Dear hackers, thanks for maintaining it on FreeBSD
you are welcome, and happy new year for everybody! :)
why rename killall? what's next? rename init? why not enhance kill? this is the
end of alias? omg...
write shell script and name it, this is not a sin. it can be a crime... but
Stephen Montgomery-Smith escribió:
I would like to introduce a program into the base called
screw-the-whole-system. It would do something like this:
while true; do \
echo Please wait while your system is being destroyed...
sleep 10
done
___
man pkill
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:18:43 -0800
Xin LI delp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Jason A. Spiro jasonspi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Craig, and hackers, are you both willing to do this?
No.
killall is not part of standard, and, just because System V choose to
implement
Am 22.12.2009 11:33, schrieb Dag-Erling Smørgrav:
man pkill
And that one is also provided on Solaris.
--
Matthias Andree
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 01:31:02AM -0500, Jason A. Spiro wrote:
Naming it the same as System V killall, which just kills all
processes, can wreak havoc. When someone types a standard Linux
killall command line as root on a Solaris or HP-UX server, System V
killall runs and kills all
On Tue, 22.12.2009 at 11:53:36 +0100, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:18:43 -0800
Xin LI delp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Jason A. Spiro jasonspi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Craig, and hackers, are you both willing to do this?
No.
killall is not
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009, Craig Small wrote:
I also agree with Daniel; why would anyone want to literally kill every
process?
AFAIK, it's a helper program for shutdown(8) (or shutdown(1M) as they call
it) and isn't really intended to be useful otherwise.
--
Nate Eldredge
I would like to introduce a program into the base called
screw-the-whole-system. It would do something like this:
while true; do \
echo Please wait while your system is being destroyed...
sleep 10
done
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 01:31, jasonspiro4@ wrote:
Dear Craig, thanks for maintaining the killall command on Linux.
Dear hackers, thanks for maintaining it on FreeBSD.
Naming it the same as System V killall, which just kills all
processes, can wreak havoc. When someone types a standard Linux
Gary Jennejohn gary.jennejohn at freenet.de writes:
I'm wondering why we even need killall when pkill seems to have the same
basic functionality and is located in /bin (and /rescue) rather than /usr/bin?
I like killall because of its -v (verbose) option. It lets me know what killall
killed.
Craig Small csmall at enc.com.au writes:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 01:31:02AM -0500, Jason A. Spiro wrote:
Hello Jason (and the FreeBSD folk),
The problem for me is that killall in Linux has been called that for a
very long time now. psmisc came out 11 years ago and before that killall
was
Daniel O'Connor doconnor at gsoft.com.au writes:
snark
Why not get Sun and HP to change killall to match Linux *BSD
behaviour?
/snark
Although seriously, why not? killall just killing everything is a fairly
dangerous command with almost no use in the real world.
Because I find that
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 2:18 AM, Xin LI delp...@gmail.com wrote:
No.
killall is not part of standard, and, just because System V choose to
implement that way, does not warrant that FreeBSD has to. Moreover,
user can always alias /sbin/killall to 'fkill' and 'kill -15 -1' to
'killall' if
jhell jhell at DataIX.net writes:
This is what shell aliases are for and what a system admins job consist
of. If it gives you that much of a problem just alias it out for your self
in your .cshrc .shrc .bashrc .bash_profile etc. If you want to change
something on a more per user basis
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Jason Spiro jasonspi...@gmail.com wrote:
jhell jhell at DataIX.net writes:
This is what shell aliases are for and what a system admins job consist
of. If it gives you that much of a problem just alias it out for your self
in your .cshrc .shrc .bashrc
Hi Xin,
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Xin LI delp...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm afraid that it's too late to change either parties, i.e. there
would be a lot of scripts that rely on the BSD or Linux behavior, etc.
That is why I suggested that you first show a warning message for five
years, then
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Jason A. Spiro jasonspi...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
Xin, I'd like to discuss this issue with you by some means other than
email.
Followup to my earlier message: Thanks for sending me a private mail
with your Jabber address. I added you. But then I saw your
Jason Spiro wrote:
Using aliases would help me, but wouldn't help people elsewhere in the world
who
don't know what SysV killall does.
Seriously, it's not our problem if solaris did something stupid. There
is no hope whatsoever that you're going to get every Unix that has a
rational
On 2009/12/22 14:54, Jason A. Spiro wrote:
Hi Xin,
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Xin LIdelp...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm afraid that it's too late to change either parties, i.e. there
would be a lot of scripts that rely on the BSD or Linux behavior, etc.
That is why I suggested that you
You forgot to mention that we should wait ten years; and after that
change it's name to killall
Stephen Montgomery-Smith schreef:
I would like to introduce a program into the base called
screw-the-whole-system. It would do something like this:
while true; do \
echo Please wait while your
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
Seriously, it's not our problem if solaris did something stupid.
Actually, it looks like the mistake was made by Linux and FreeBSD
developers. SunOS had[1] killall in 1992, and maybe earlier. Craig
said the earliest
Jason A. Spiro wrote:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
There
is no hope whatsoever that you're going to get every Unix that has a
rational 'killall' command to change, so can we please drop this thread?
It's never too late to change something for the
Xin LI delphij at delphij.net writes:
killall can be used by scripts which just works in the past, and will
never notice the warnings.
On what scripts will nobody notice the warnings? For example, AFAIK, cron job
output is always mailed to root. The only scripts I can think of are scripts
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
And yet there is ZERO interest in changing this in FreeBSD.
As you can see elsewhere in this thread, I am discussing it with Xin.
So far, both he and the Linux killall maintainer have said no, but I
am using rational
On 2009/12/22 16:21, Jason Spiro wrote:
Xin LIdelphijat delphij.net writes:
killall can be used by scripts which just works in the past, and will
never notice the warnings.
On what scripts will nobody notice the warnings? For example, AFAIK, cron job
output is always mailed to root. The
Jason A. Spiro wrote:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
And yet there is ZERO interest in changing this in FreeBSD.
As you can see elsewhere in this thread, I am discussing it with Xin.
So far, both he and the Linux killall maintainer have said no, but I
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009, Jason A. Spiro wrote:
Naming it the same as System V killall, which just kills all
processes, can wreak havoc. When someone types a standard Linux
killall command line as root on a Solaris or HP-UX server, System V
killall runs and kills all processes.
It might be good
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Jason A. Spiro jasonspi...@gmail.com wrote:
Craig, and hackers, are you both willing to do this?
No.
killall is not part of standard, and, just because System V choose to
implement that way, does not warrant that FreeBSD has to. Moreover,
user can always alias
On 7 Aug 2008, at 11:53, Anders Nore wrote:
Hi,
In my pkg_improved GSoC project I've added a nice feature for
'pkg_add -r' which displays the size of the file being downloaded as
well as progress status in % and bytes/kb/mb/... and download speed.
If someone could test it and comment it
RELENG_7:
http://home.no.net/andenore/patches/pkg_install_2008-08-06_RELENG_7.diff
CURRENT:
http://home.no.net/andenore/patches/pkg_install_2008-08-06_CURRENT.diff
Some comments:
* I think you have reversed the patch. :-)
* Build errors:
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
file.c:433:
On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 22:40:35 +0200, Lars Engels [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 03:47:24PM +0200, Anders Nore wrote:
RELENG_7:
http://home.no.net/andenore/patches/pkg_install_2008-08-06_RELENG_7.diff
CURRENT:
Baldur Gislason wrote:
I agree, that would be a nice feature in usbd, but a workaround to gain the same functionality would be:
attach /usr/sbin/moused `/usr/bin/perl -e 'while() { $foo = $_ . $foo; } if($foo =~ /^moused_flags=(.*?)$/im) { print $1; }' /etc/rc.conf` -p /dev/${DEVNAME} -I
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 11:49:22AM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
Baldur Gislason wrote:
I agree, that would be a nice feature in usbd, but a workaround to gain
the same functionality would be:
attach /usr/sbin/moused `/usr/bin/perl -e 'while() { $foo = $_ . $foo;
} if($foo =~
On Mon 2002-10-28 (13:57), Peter Pentchev wrote:
This had better be . /etc/defaults/rc.conf; source_rc_confs; ... :)
I have been thinking for quite some time of writing a little utility
that parses various configuration file mechanisms and allows the
administrator to specify which config
Unless the network is lying to me again, Robert Withrow said:
I notice that usbd.conf has this for the mouse device:
[..]
I have a laptop that uses different moused_flags depending on the mouse
being built-in or USB. I hate to say it, but perhaps introducing
I agree, that would be a nice feature in usbd, but a workaround to gain the same
functionality would be:
attach /usr/sbin/moused `/usr/bin/perl -e 'while() { $foo = $_ . $foo; } if($foo =~
/^moused_flags=(.*?)$/im) { print $1; }' /etc/rc.conf` -p /dev/${DEVNAME} -I
also when the client loggs out would have to remove one instance of that
address
what do you think...
francis
From: Giorgos Keramidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Francis little [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: suggestion/patch for ftpd
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 23:12:27 +0200
On 2002-02-08 08:36
On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 06:28:56PM +1030, Greg Lehey wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2001 at 22:45:22 -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Hiten Pandya wrote:
i wanted to ask if there were any _plans_ to port
JFS (Journaled File System) to FreeBSD...
Not unless you have plans. When I was an IBM
Tony wrote:
1. JFS only operates on meta-data ... It does not log file data or
recover this data to a consistent state. [JFS overview]
Yes.
The logging style introduces a synchronous write to the log disk
into each inode or vfs operation that modifies meta-data. [JFS
This doesn't sound any more robust than FreeBSD's current
Softupdates. JFS wins though as fsck is faster on a reboot ...
Please correct me if I'm wrong. But I heard that Kirk (or perhaps someone else)
is continuing softupdates development with the intent of removing any
dependency
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Greg Lehey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On Monday, 10 December 2001 at 22:45:22 -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
No, it's not. The Linux JFS is derived from the OS/2 JFS code, not
the good AIX JFS code.
That's correct, but note that AIX is moving to this code base too,
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hiten
Pandya [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
hi,
BTW, i am a first timer at porting a file system...
That is okay, few programmers ever port more than one file system.
Most useful is to have some experience programming and debugging FreeBSD
kernel code.
Also useful
Hi,
as i said also before, my intentions were never to
cause havoc on the mailing list. :-)
In simple terms, what i am saying is, the people who
would like to port the JFS file system, should put a
+1 in their next message and -1 if they dont like to
port JFS.
Then, i will count the votes,
On Wednesday, 12 December 2001 at 1:43:10 -0800, Hiten Pandya wrote:
Hi,
as i said also before, my intentions were never to cause havoc on
the mailing list. :-)
In simple terms, what i am saying is, the people who would like to
port the JFS file system, should put a +1 in their next
Greg Lehey wrote:
Since then, it has become possible for the loader to load modules
before booting the kernel. This means that, theoretically, it would
be possible to have a JFS root file system. Given the strong
opposition to the GPL in some factions of the FreeBSD project, I don't
see
Greg Lehey wrote:
FS porting to FreeBSD is actually pretty trivial(*), though some
transactioning changes to the FreeBSD VFS layer consumers (the
system calls and NFS server code) would be necessary to make
the journal roll-back function correctly, following a failure.
(*) Trivial:
Terry Lambert wrote:
Greg Lehey wrote:
Since then, it has become possible for the loader to load modules
before booting the kernel. This means that, theoretically, it would
be possible to have a JFS root file system. Given the strong
opposition to the GPL in some factions of the
Terry Lambert wrote:
Greg Lehey wrote:
Since then, it has become possible for the loader to load modules
before booting the kernel. This means that, theoretically, it would
be possible to have a JFS root file system. Given the strong
opposition to the GPL in some factions of the
[... Hiten want's to GPL'ify FreeBSD ...]
hi,
first of all, i would like to clear of some point
which
have been taken wrongly.
o My Intentions were never to GPL'ify FreeBSD :-)
o The reason i started this discussion was because
i think JFS/JFS2 would be a nice addition to
FreeBSD like
On Tuesday 11 December 2001 10:26 am, Hiten Pandya wrote:
[... Hiten want's to GPL'ify FreeBSD ...]
hi,
first of all, i would like to clear of some point
which
have been taken wrongly.
What mail client do you use? It seems to be playing havoc with your
line breaks.
o My Intentions
hi,
BTW, i am a first timer at porting a file system...
if the proffesionals think that it is not wise or
useful to port the FS (especially IBM's), it is OK,
but, just in case, anyone else (more than three
people)
would like to port this FS to FreeBSD, my target would
be to get it done by
Maxim Sobolev wrote:
OK, I load the kernel from the JFS. I mount the root FS, which
is a JFS. I read the module jfs.ko from the JFS so that I can
mount the root FS, which is a JFS, so I can read the module jfs.ko
from the JFS so that I can mount the root FS, which is a JFS, so I
can
Peter Wemm wrote:
It is not a problem. The *kernel* does not load jfs.ko, it is loader
itself. There is no reason why a trivial non-gpl jfs reader couldn't be
written for boot2 and loader if the need was great enough. Or have /boot
as a seperate file system (eg: UFS or FAT32). We do this
that would be nice i suppose.. :-)
BTW, where is this non-GPL code.. i wouldn't mind
putting my hands on it and working on it...
=Hiten
=[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maxim Sobolev wrote:
OK, I load the kernel from the JFS. I mount the
root FS, which
is
On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 04:01:04AM -0800, Hiten Pandya wrote:
but thats only if three of more people are _really_
interested in porting it... cause as you know...
porting an IBM file system (from looks) is not a
one man job :-)
It is probably a one man job if that man knows the kernel
Josef Karthauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is probably a one man job if that man knows the kernel inside
and out in these areas, and has the time and energy to see it
through. I'd suggest that you find a much much smaller area to
work on yourself for now though. (Take a look in the PR
On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 07:58:04PM +, Wayne Pascoe wrote:
Josef Karthauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is probably a one man job if that man knows the kernel inside
and out in these areas, and has the time and energy to see it
through. I'd suggest that you find a much much smaller
On Tuesday, 11 December 2001 at 1:08:23 -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Greg Lehey wrote:
FS porting to FreeBSD is actually pretty trivial(*), though some
transactioning changes to the FreeBSD VFS layer consumers (the
system calls and NFS server code) would be necessary to make
the journal
Greg Lehey wrote:
Of course. But you're missing the point: ufs is *not* a port, it has
been with BSD since the beginning. There is a similar list of items
for JFS which would need to be addressed, with the additional issue of
the fact that it was not designed for FreeBSD.
I maintain that
I think I would rather see people tweaking the heck out of the existing UFS
filesystem and implementing new ways of getting it to go faster.
Implementing a whole new filesystem would probably take a lot of work, and
the performance wouldn't be much better anyways. IMHO, people interested in
On Tuesday, 11 December 2001 at 19:42:30 -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Greg Lehey wrote:
Of course. But you're missing the point: ufs is *not* a port, it has
been with BSD since the beginning. There is a similar list of items
for JFS which would need to be addressed, with the additional issue
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 02:01:53PM -0800, Hiten Pandya wrote:
hi all,
this is a wild idea...suggestion...
i wanted to ask if there were any _plans_ to port
JFS (Journaled File System) to FreeBSD...
Hi Hiten,
Search the mail list archives (from www.freebsd.org) for JFS and XFS.
You'll
* Hiten Pandya [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011210 16:02] wrote:
hi all,
this is a wild idea...suggestion...
i wanted to ask if there were any _plans_ to port
JFS (Journaled File System) to FreeBSD...
as for JFS, it is developed by IBM for Linux and
is licensed under GPL, so we could put this
* Hiten Pandya [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011210 16:02] wrote:
hi all,
this is a wild idea...suggestion...
i wanted to ask if there were any _plans_ to port
JFS (Journaled File System) to FreeBSD...
as for JFS, it is developed by IBM for Linux and
is licensed under GPL, so we could put
* Matthew Emmerton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011210 16:40] wrote:
* Hiten Pandya [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011210 16:02] wrote:
hi all,
this is a wild idea...suggestion...
i wanted to ask if there were any _plans_ to port
JFS (Journaled File System) to FreeBSD...
as for JFS, it is
I'm no expert on journaled filesystems, but isn't the freebsd softupdates
option similar? perhaps there could be an upgrade to offer
options SOFTERUPDATES
as an equal-but-different alternative to jfs?
-Anthony.
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 05:39:35PM -0500, Matthew Emmerton wrote:
* Hiten
hi,
the license issues dont really affect us...
after all we have an src/gnu directory... thats what
it is for... dumping GPL'ed stuff
and talking about GPL, we can even publish the code
as the GPL license states... after all we are an
open Source Project, but if we were commercial...
it
[Format recovered--see http://www.lemis.com/email/email-format.html]
Long-short syndrome in first message.
On Monday, 10 December 2001 at 14:01:53 -0800, Hiten Pandya wrote:
hi all,
this is a wild idea...suggestion...
i wanted to ask if there were any _plans_ to port
JFS (Journaled File
On Tuesday, 11 December 2001 at 10:56:17 +1030, Greg Lehey wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2001 at 17:39:35 -0500, Matthew Emmerton wrote:
* Hiten Pandya [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011210 16:02] wrote:
hi all,
this is a wild idea...suggestion...
i wanted to ask if there were any _plans_ to port
JFS
On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Greg Lehey wrote:
On Monday, 10 December 2001 at 17:47:11 -0500, Anthony Schneider wrote:
perhaps there could be an upgrade to offer
options SOFTERUPDATES
as an equal-but-different alternative to jfs?
And what would that do?
SOFTERUPDATES includes a switch to
On Monday, 10 December 2001 at 17:47:11 -0500, Anthony Schneider wrote:
I'm no expert on journaled filesystems, but isn't the freebsd softupdates
option similar?
No, at least not from a technical standpoint. From a user standpoint,
they both try to make things faster and more reliable,
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Anthony Schneider
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
perhaps there could be an upgrade to offer
options SOFTERUPDATES
as an equal-but-different alternative to jfs?
And what would that do?
My thoughts were that if the two were similar in effect that it might be
a
Most current users will probably not like the speed penalties of a
journal file system, and stick to the faster FS. On the other hand a
solid journal FS may encourage more take up for back end databases, for
e-commerce, data warehousing, etc...
The transaction support of JFS isn't really
Hiten Pandya wrote:
i wanted to ask if there were any _plans_ to port
JFS (Journaled File System) to FreeBSD...
Not unless you have plans. When I was an IBM employee, they would
not change the license, and so it's impossible to ship a CDROM
where it's the boot FS, or boxes on which it is the
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
[ ... Hiten wants someone to GPLify FreeBSD ... ]
I'm glad you took the time to read the marketting literature.
The problem is that porting it is going to be a bit more complicated
than just dumping it into src/gnu.
Feel free to take a shot at porting it though,
* Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011211 00:48] wrote:
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
[ ... Hiten wants someone to GPLify FreeBSD ... ]
I'm glad you took the time to read the marketting literature.
The problem is that porting it is going to be a bit more complicated
than just dumping it
Hiten Pandya wrote:
the license issues dont really affect us...
after all we have an src/gnu directory... thats what
it is for... dumping GPL'ed stuff
and talking about GPL, we can even publish the code
as the GPL license states... after all we are an
open Source Project, but if we
On Monday, 10 December 2001 at 22:45:22 -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Hiten Pandya wrote:
i wanted to ask if there were any _plans_ to port
JFS (Journaled File System) to FreeBSD...
Not unless you have plans. When I was an IBM employee, they would
not change the license, and so it's
On Monday, 10 December 2001 at 22:48:58 -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
[ ... Hiten wants someone to GPLify FreeBSD ... ]
I'm glad you took the time to read the marketting literature.
The problem is that porting it is going to be a bit more complicated
than just
I plan on doing some work on it and the dgm driver. They're almost
the same and should be merged. They both violate style(9) in almost
every way too :-[
I know of only one person with an Xem card (dgm driver), but he's
promised to send me the specs by snail mail. Once I get
One other suggestion, while I'm at it.
The dgb driver has been marked alpha quality for a LONG time.
I've had a fax server running on a PC/Xe 8 port card (64k shared RAM)
for well over a year on one of these cards - and have NEVER had a single
problem with it. That server gets a LOT of
On Sat, May 22, 1999 at 02:33:51PM +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
One other suggestion, while I'm at it.
The dgb driver has been marked alpha quality for a LONG time.
I've had a fax server running on a PC/Xe 8 port card (64k shared RAM)
for well over a year on one of these cards - and
On 22-May-99 Karl Denninger wrote:
On Sat, May 22, 1999 at 02:33:51PM +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
One other suggestion, while I'm at it.
The dgb driver has been marked alpha quality for a LONG time.
I've had a fax server running on a PC/Xe 8 port card (64k shared RAM)
for well over
Karl Denninger scribbled this message on May 21:
One other suggestion, while I'm at it.
The dgb driver has been marked alpha quality for a LONG time.
I've had a fax server running on a PC/Xe 8 port card (64k shared RAM)
for well over a year on one of these cards - and have NEVER had a
85 matches
Mail list logo
