There was some mention in the SBLive earlier this year (January), whatever
became of it? I checked www.posi.net and I do not see the driver listed
there at all. Pointers/suggestions?
it's listed there.
the guy does not reply the mails, however
-- mauzi
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Dan Nelson wrote:
:In the last episode (Feb 16), Greg Lehey said:
: On Tuesday, 15 February 2000 at 3:40:58 -0600, Joe Greco wrote:
:
: Dunno how many terabyte filesystem folks are out there.
:
: None, by the looks of it.
:
:Possibly no FreeBSD folks, but on Solaris,
Hi,
I recently got this DEC PC which has an 21142 ethernet chip onboard.
Using -current's dc driver I get:
Feb 17 19:37:39 p6 /kernel: Correcting Natoma config for non-SMP
Feb 17 19:37:39 p6 /kernel: dc0: Intel 21143 10/100BaseTX port
0xec00-0xec7f m
em 0xfdfffc00-0xfdfffc7f irq 11 at device
Just read this article:
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2440002,00.html
Which leads to my potentially ignorant question: Where is FreeBSD
w/regards to running on the Itanium (or other 64bit chips)?
-Steve
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe
Which leads to my potentially ignorant question: Where is FreeBSD
w/regards to running on the Itanium (or other 64bit chips)?
Waiting for somebody at Intel to give us either hardware or simulator
time. Without either of those things, "working on" Itanium support
is a pretty pointless
On Thu, Feb 17, 2000 at 02:26:16PM -0800, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
Which leads to my potentially ignorant question: Where is FreeBSD
w/regards to running on the Itanium (or other 64bit chips)?
Waiting for somebody at Intel to give us either hardware or simulator
time. Without either of
Just read this article:
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2440002,00.html
Which leads to my potentially ignorant question: Where is FreeBSD
w/regards to running on the Itanium (or other 64bit chips)?
Considering the fact that Intel released the IA-64 OS info only on the
Patryk Zadarnowski wrote:
FreeBSD when that happens. In the meantime, the only alternative would be to
convince Intel to give someone their IA-64 SimOS, but there's an extermely
slim chance of that happening (from talking to someone on the IA-64 team.)
An alternative to IA-64 is the alpha
Patryk Zadarnowski wrote:
FreeBSD when that happens. In the meantime, the only alternative would be to
convince Intel to give someone their IA-64 SimOS, but there's an extermely
slim chance of that happening (from talking to someone on the IA-64 team.)
An alternative to IA-64 is the
An alternative to IA-64 is the alpha processor. Last time
I checked, FreeBSD ran just peachy on a 64-bit processor. ;-)
Check out Cmpaq's test drive program.
I don't know... I'm still to get it to boot on mine (NetBSD runs fine, but for
some bizzare reason, FreeBSD insists on a serial
Which leads to my potentially ignorant question: Where is FreeBSD
w/regards to running on the Itanium (or other 64bit chips)?
Waiting for somebody at Intel to give us either hardware or simulator
time. Without either of those things, "working on" Itanium support
is a pretty pointless
This is only the second time ever this has happened, but it is still an
interesting problem... I have a large number of "emacs" processes stuck in
disk-wait. Here is the ps axl line for one such process:
33639 88194 1 0 -22 0 5856 340 vmpfw D qi- 0:01.34 emacs proxy.
Any
- Original Message -
From: "Marco van de Voort" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2000 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: 64bit OS?
Which leads to my potentially ignorant question: Where is FreeBSD
w/regards to running on the Itanium (or other 64bit chips)?
On Fri, 18 Feb 2000, Patryk Zadarnowski wrote:
I don't know... I'm still to get it to boot on mine (NetBSD runs fine, but for
some bizzare reason, FreeBSD insists on a serial console ;) Anyway, alphas are
boring compared to Itanium. What else can you say about a chip with 3MB of L3
cache
Which leads to my potentially ignorant question: Where is FreeBSD
w/regards to running on the Itanium (or other 64bit chips)?
Waiting for somebody at Intel to give us either hardware or simulator
time. Without either of those things, "working on" Itanium support
is a pretty
"I could have had a PA-8600!"? Today, and not at some vague point in the
future?
That sort-of misses the point, as I'm taking a research OS perspective, where
IA-64 is trully unique in terms of versitality and a well thought-through
design (especially when it comes to SASOS support!)
What can one say to that, apart from "I have one right here and it works
just fine" - not something you can say about the IA-64. 8)
I'll just reach down and pat my trusty pair of manufactured-in-1993 Alpha
3000's on their heads... :)
Oh, forgot... It's not new until Intel does it...
What can one say to that, apart from "I have one right here and it works
just fine" - not something you can say about the IA-64. 8)
I'll just reach down and pat my trusty pair of manufactured-in-1993 Alpha
3000's on their heads... :)
Oh, forgot... It's not new until Intel does
I'd say this is more likely a VM bug rather then an NFS bug. I don't
think anything is being corrupted, I think it may just be a deadlock.
For this sort of problem you should be able to gdb the kernel live on
the system (without core'ing it) and then look at the stack backtrace
On Thu, Feb 17, 2000 at 05:19:21PM -0500, Steve Ames wrote:
Just read this article:
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2440002,00.html
Which leads to my potentially ignorant question: Where is FreeBSD
w/regards to running on the Itanium (or other 64bit chips)?
FreeBSD runs
Ok... we'll start with the process table...
monica# ps axl | grep D
UID PID PPID CPU PRI NI VSZ RSS WCHAN STAT TT TIME COMMAND
0 0 0 0 -18 0 00 sched DLs ??0:00.81 (swapper)
0 2 0 0 -18 0 00 psleep DL??1:10.93
21 matches
Mail list logo
