On 5/27/11 11:34 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
On May 27, 2011, at 10:47 AM, rank1see...@gmail.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Alexander Bestarun...@freebsd.org
To: rank1see...@gmail.com
Cc: hack...@freebsd.org
Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 13:47:54 +
Subject: Re: Active slice, only for a
On Fri May 27 11, Warner Losh wrote:
On May 27, 2011, at 12:14 PM, Alexander Best wrote:
On Fri May 27 11, Warner Losh wrote:
These look generally good. Just one thing I had a question on:
#
+# Enable FreeBSD kernel-specific printf format specifiers. Also instruct
gcc to
+#
On 28 May 2011 10:04, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 5/27/11 11:34 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
On May 27, 2011, at 10:47 AM, rank1see...@gmail.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Alexander Bestarun...@freebsd.org
To: rank1see...@gmail.com
Cc: hack...@freebsd.org
Date:
And how about this:
# boot0cfg -o noupdate -s 1
Now when you choose to hit slice 2, it is only for a this one boot.
Next and each boot, defaults to slice 1
Problem is, that you must see, early bootstrap, to manually choose, so this
won't work on a remote server.
This requires:
a) physicall
Alexander Best arun...@freebsd.org writes:
On Fri May 27 11, Alexander Best wrote:
On Fri May 27 11, Warner Losh wrote:
These look generally good. Just one thing I had a question on:
#
+# Enable FreeBSD kernel-specific printf format specifiers. Also instruct
gcc to
+# enable
On 5/28/11 6:06 AM, rank1see...@gmail.com wrote:
And how about this:
# boot0cfg -o noupdate -s 1
Now when you choose to hit slice 2, it is only for a this one boot.
Next and each boot, defaults to slice 1
Problem is, that you must see, early bootstrap, to manually choose, so this
won't work
On 5/28/11 4:06 AM, Chris Rees wrote:
On 28 May 2011 10:04, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org
mailto:jul...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 5/27/11 11:34 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
On May 27, 2011, at 10:47 AM, rank1see...@gmail.com
mailto:rank1see...@gmail.com wrote:
- Original Message -
On 5/28/11 11:10 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 5/28/11 4:06 AM, Chris Rees wrote:
On 28 May 2011 10:04, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org
mailto:jul...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 5/27/11 11:34 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
On May 27, 2011, at 10:47 AM, rank1see...@gmail.com
On Sat May 28 11, Pan Tsu wrote:
Alexander Best arun...@freebsd.org writes:
On Fri May 27 11, Alexander Best wrote:
On Fri May 27 11, Warner Losh wrote:
These look generally good. Just one thing I had a question on:
#
+# Enable FreeBSD kernel-specific printf format
On Sat May 28 11, Alexander Best wrote:
On Sat May 28 11, Pan Tsu wrote:
Alexander Best arun...@freebsd.org writes:
On Fri May 27 11, Alexander Best wrote:
On Fri May 27 11, Warner Losh wrote:
These look generally good. Just one thing I had a question on:
#
+# Enable
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 06:23:26PM +, Alexander Best wrote:
well i'm not an expert on this. but are we 100% sure that a kernel on amd64
compiled with -O2 frename-registers can be debugged the same way as one with
-O? if that is the case: sure...-O2 is fine. ;)
however i've often read
On Sat May 28 11, Bruce Cran wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 06:23:26PM +, Alexander Best wrote:
well i'm not an expert on this. but are we 100% sure that a kernel on amd64
compiled with -O2 frename-registers can be debugged the same way as one with
-O? if that is the case: sure...-O2
On Sat May 28 11, Alexander Best wrote:
On Sat May 28 11, Bruce Cran wrote:
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 06:23:26PM +, Alexander Best wrote:
well i'm not an expert on this. but are we 100% sure that a kernel on
amd64
compiled with -O2 frename-registers can be debugged the same way
Hi,
I would like to suggest to try 8.2.
It is my experience that the different version behave very different on the
same hardware. It does not mean that the newer version is the better. As an
example, I have a machine here on 7.x as 8.0 did not support the USB hardware
found. After a machine
14 matches
Mail list logo
