Ramkumar Chinchani wrote:
Has the POSIX event standard implemeted in FreeBSD? POSIX events are logged to
a file. Which would give a better performance, assuming kevent can register more
events?
Are you talking about POSIX persistent queueing, of the type not
implemented by the POSIX printing
On Fri, 3 May 2002, Leo Bicknell wrote:
At the end of the day, we need to lower the barrier to adding
documentation, while increasing the quality. Far from an easy task.
I agree with your point. It would be nice to break down barriers to
documentation. However, I don't think any of the
Josef Grosch writes:
This question came up at last night BAFUG meeting. What hardware do people
use and/or recommend? Specifically, if you were going to build a machine,
using commonly available parts and just to run a generic kernel, what
ethernet, video, motherboards, etc, would you use and/or
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 05:39:01PM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
You probably want to have a good look at usb_ethersubr.c - it does this
sort of thing already, but for different reasons. On FreeBSD, the usb
hardware interrupts ran (pre-SMPng) as bio, not net. All of the
assumptions, problems
Jonathan Mini wrote:
Maybe you could ask Archie or Ambrisko to clarify the feature
you're trying to replace, and then ask Mike about the code
needed to do that?
ehem..
WHO wrote that?
:-)
My original aim was to allow a system to boot successfully using a
sequence of possible
Gordon Tetlow wrote:
On Thu, 9 May 2002, Michael Smith wrote:
I've finally learned enough forth to put together a diff to implement some
nextboot functionality in the loader.
Basically, the loader peeks into the first line of /boot/nextboot.conf to
see if nextboot_enable=YES
Julian Elischer wrote:
I wrote the original 'nextboot to use block 1 (ususally unused)
to avoid under all circumstances writing into the filesystem.
Also, part of the weakness of the current system is that it presumes you know
which IS the root filesystem. The original nextboot took as part
Picking a random message to respond to...
On Fri, 10 May 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
It's actually just as easy to make boot1 go read it itself, assuming
boot1 has the ability to read. It also decouples it somewhat, which
(IMO) is a good thing. This is actually the same effect they get from
On 10-May-2002 Julian Elischer wrote:
You also had to have:
1/ a way of setting the boot specification list from the running system.
2/ a simple and unlikely-to-break method of ensuring that if the boot did NOT
succeed, it did something DIFFERENT next time.
3/ the ability to read the
Removing crosspost.
On Fri, 10 May 2002, Josef Grosch wrote:
This question came up at last night BAFUG meeting. What hardware do people
use and/or recommend? Specifically, if you were going to build a machine,
using commonly available parts and just to run a generic kernel, what
ethernet,
This looks much more like a syslog/audit/... mechanism, and not really
much like keven, which is about applications getting event notification on
system objects. You might be interested in talking to Andrew Reiter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] about his work on the TrustedBSD audit framework, but
otherwise
Hi!
Preface:
Same directory is null-mounted to /mnt and /mnt2. The directory
contain dir/foofile. Two processes concurently lookup /mnt/dir/foofile
and /mnt2/dir/foofile.
Action:
P1:
in lookup():
in VOP_LOOKUP(dvp (== /mnt/dir), foofile):
in null_lookup():
in
Last call for submissions due this afternoon.
Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project
[EMAIL PROTECTED] NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 15:59:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ramkumar Chinchani wrote:
I am asking more in terms of the posix event logging mechanism being
implemented in Linux 2.5.x kernel.
http://evlog.sourceforge.net/
How does the kevent mechanism of event notification and handling compare
to this scheme?
The POSIX 1003.25 draft that they are
Robert Watson wrote:
This looks much more like a syslog/audit/... mechanism, and not really
much like keven, which is about applications getting event notification on
system objects. You might be interested in talking to Andrew Reiter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] about his work on the TrustedBSD audit
Is there anything that is wrong with the conceptual implementation of the
nextboot loader code that I've submitted? It definitely needs a code
cleanup on the forth side (which I'm not qualified to do), but if there
are no other objections, I'd really like to see this code committed.
-gordon
To
John Baldwin wrote:
Now is when I point out that the original nextboot predates the ELF
format conversion, as well as the new FORTH based loader code...
which predates running on anything other than i386 anyway (unless
you count my Motorolla Powerstack port, or Vogel's SPARC port,
back
On Fri, 10 May 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
Gordon Tetlow wrote:
Is there anything that is wrong with the conceptual implementation of the
nextboot loader code that I've submitted? It definitely needs a code
cleanup on the forth side (which I'm not qualified to do), but if there
are no
I am working on vm86 bios call crash bug for CURRENT and have already a
working patch on my machine, I have tested the patch under heavy loaded,
seems be very stable. in the patch, I replace current thread pcb pointer to
a temporary pcb, the pcb of course is not created by pmap, I am not very
On Fri, 10 May 2002, Doug White wrote:
usually have onboard everything, including dual fxp's nowadays. But they
have the ServerWorks curse.
. Tyan makes some interesting stuff, but as with all ServerWorks based
stuff, stay far, far away from the base ATA33 controller. Even the cheap
what
20 matches
Mail list logo
