It seems David Krinsky wrote:
> I posted this to -hardware a few days ago and haven't
> gotten much in the way of feedback; since it sounds to me
> like a driver bug this seems like an appropriate forum too.
>
> Is anyone here using -any- ATAPI drive for backup?
Yup, I use one:
ast0: tape driv
Through a mis-order I have aquired a PERC card (Actually an AMI megaRAID)
which I am happy to make available to anyone genuinly interested in working
on a driver (This is the PCI RAID card that goes into Dells Power Edge servers
if ordered in a RAID configuration)
--
Geoff Buckingham
Systems Ma
please followup only in hackers.
I've Just cvsuped freebsd RELENG_3 as of this evening (~21:00 mdt)
and using a rom built with etherboot 4.1b9 which has worked flawlessly for
the last couple of months. Tonight I getting
Searching for server...
My IP xxx.yyy.zzz.www Server IP aaa.bbb.ccc.dd
I posted this to -hardware a few days ago and haven't
gotten much in the way of feedback; since it sounds to me
like a driver bug this seems like an appropriate forum too.
Is anyone here using -any- ATAPI drive for backup?
Thanks in advance for any help you can provide...this is
screwy, and I r
Warner Losh wrote:
>
> In message <199909012256.paa01...@dingo.cdrom.com> Mike Smith writes:
> : If we do this, I hope a more obvious name is chosen; something like
> : "mailman" might be a start. Or "mailperson", or "postperson", or
> : whatever. "mta" just feels a little obscure.
>
> postmanp
It seems David Krinsky wrote:
> I posted this to -hardware a few days ago and haven't
> gotten much in the way of feedback; since it sounds to me
> like a driver bug this seems like an appropriate forum too.
>
> Is anyone here using -any- ATAPI drive for backup?
Yup, I use one:
ast0: tape dri
please followup only in hackers.
I've Just cvsuped freebsd RELENG_3 as of this evening (~21:00 mdt)
and using a rom built with etherboot 4.1b9 which has worked flawlessly for
the last couple of months. Tonight I getting
Searching for server...
My IP xxx.yyy.zzz.www Server IP aaa.bbb.ccc.d
I posted this to -hardware a few days ago and haven't
gotten much in the way of feedback; since it sounds to me
like a driver bug this seems like an appropriate forum too.
Is anyone here using -any- ATAPI drive for backup?
Thanks in advance for any help you can provide...this is
screwy, and I
Warner Losh wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mike Smith writes:
> : If we do this, I hope a more obvious name is chosen; something like
> : "mailman" might be a start. Or "mailperson", or "postperson", or
> : whatever. "mta" just feels a little obscure.
>
> postmanpete
>
> which is b
>
> Didn't they actually kinda do this when they announced the availability of
> Solaris source code, and then that didn't really seem to materialize the
> first time around? Maybe my recolection of events is somewhat blurred...
>
I remember this (under the community source code license). But
Chris Costello wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 02, 1999, Robert Sexton wrote:
> > I'd have to agree with the "Lets be more professional" crowd.
> >
> > How about as a LINT option? "If you need something so banal, you can
> > turn it on yourself"
>
>No, since it would just be useless bloat in the sou
Ollivier Robert wrote:
>
> According to Nick Sayer:
> > Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
>
> Yes. We are also FreeBSD users/developers because we don't follow the Linux
> way. Bogomips are [as it says] bogus and many people acknoledge this but far
> too ofte
>
> Didn't they actually kinda do this when they announced the availability of
> Solaris source code, and then that didn't really seem to materialize the
> first time around? Maybe my recolection of events is somewhat blurred...
>
I remember this (under the community source code license). But
Chris Costello wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 02, 1999, Robert Sexton wrote:
> > I'd have to agree with the "Lets be more professional" crowd.
> >
> > How about as a LINT option? "If you need something so banal, you can
> > turn it on yourself"
>
>No, since it would just be useless bloat in the so
Ollivier Robert wrote:
>
> According to Nick Sayer:
> > Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
>
> Yes. We are also FreeBSD users/developers because we don't follow the Linux
> way. Bogomips are [as it says] bogus and many people acknoledge this but far
> too oft
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> IIRC some time ago there was a vivid discussion about ability to
> change/set MAC address of Ethernet cards. I'm faced with similar problem
> right now: when building high-availability configuration it would be very
> handy to do MAC takeo
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> IIRC some time ago there was a vivid discussion about ability to
> change/set MAC address of Ethernet cards. I'm faced with similar problem
> right now: when building high-availability configuration it would be very
> handy to do MAC take
In article you write:
>> CPU: Pentium/P54C (132.73-MHz 586-class CPU)
>> Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x52c Stepping=12
>> Features=0x1bf
>>
>> Seems more precise and informative. For 386/486 based hardware
>> someone could adapt one of the numerous CPU speed detection routines
>> out there
sheld...@uunet.co.za said:
:- Emotional arguments and matters of personal preference aren't
:- helpful.
The only emotional argumentation seems to be yours.
A "technical" objection was made that it seems best for ports to create
whatever resources they need, and not polute base distribution with
In article you write:
>> CPU: Pentium/P54C (132.73-MHz 586-class CPU)
>> Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x52c Stepping=12
>> Features=0x1bf
>>
>> Seems more precise and informative. For 386/486 based hardware
>> someone could adapt one of the numerous CPU speed detection routines
>> out ther
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
:- Emotional arguments and matters of personal preference aren't
:- helpful.
The only emotional argumentation seems to be yours.
A "technical" objection was made that it seems best for ports to create
whatever resources they need, and not polute base distribution with
th
> CPU: Pentium/P54C (132.73-MHz 586-class CPU)
> Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x52c Stepping=12
> Features=0x1bf
>
> Seems more precise and informative. For 386/486 based hardware
> someone could adapt one of the numerous CPU speed detection routines
> out there.
Indeed. In fact, if someon
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Ollivier Robert wrote:
> According to Nick Sayer:
> > Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
>
> Yes. We are also FreeBSD users/developers because we don't follow the Linux
> way. Bogomips are [as it says] bogus and many people acknoledge thi
"Matthew N. Dodd" wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > There was such a thing in 386BSD and FreeBSD1.0
> >
> > I certainly thing it was a worth-while thing.
> > I'd try make the loop as similar to the Linux one so that they are
> > comparable.
>
> My vote is to make the numbe
According to Nick Sayer:
> Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
Yes. We are also FreeBSD users/developers because we don't follow the Linux
way. Bogomips are [as it says] bogus and many people acknoledge this but far
too often you see in some Linux list/newsgrou
> CPU: Pentium/P54C (132.73-MHz 586-class CPU)
> Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x52c Stepping=12
> Features=0x1bf
>
> Seems more precise and informative. For 386/486 based hardware
> someone could adapt one of the numerous CPU speed detection routines
> out there.
Indeed. In fact, if someo
> This still doesn't entirely
Oops. I didn't finish that thought again after the vi -r.
I meant to say that even with a modifed kernel mount() call, there
are difficulties getting all of the configuration possibities into
the kernel propper. (Mount Options, What FS types to try, etc).
- Ste
On Fri, Sep 03, 1999 at 03:01:26AM +0800, adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
> > The user would still have to know what type of filesystem is on
> > the volume. My code tries filesystem types from a list, one by
> > one, so the same command or desktop icon will mount a FAT, UFS, or
> > EXT2FS floppy, for
On 02-Sep-99 smc...@aol.com wrote:
> Im currently using FreeBSD-3.2 stable. How do you get UDMA support working
> under FreeBSD? Do I need FreeBSD 4-Current?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Sam
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Ollivier Robert wrote:
> According to Nick Sayer:
> > Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
>
> Yes. We are also FreeBSD users/developers because we don't follow the Linux
> way. Bogomips are [as it says] bogus and many people acknoledge th
"Matthew N. Dodd" wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > There was such a thing in 386BSD and FreeBSD1.0
> >
> > I certainly thing it was a worth-while thing.
> > I'd try make the loop as similar to the Linux one so that they are
> > comparable.
>
> My vote is to make the numb
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Julian Elischer wrote:
> There was such a thing in 386BSD and FreeBSD1.0
>
> I certainly thing it was a worth-while thing.
> I'd try make the loop as similar to the Linux one so that they are
> comparable.
My vote is to make the number printed in parity with the number printed
According to Nick Sayer:
> Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
Yes. We are also FreeBSD users/developers because we don't follow the Linux
way. Bogomips are [as it says] bogus and many people acknoledge this but far
too often you see in some Linux list/newsgro
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 12:51:49PM -0400, Wayne Cuddy wrote:
> I had a configuration where I was logging from linux to linux which was
> working. Now I have replaced the logging system with FreeBSD 3.2.
>
> I started the FreeBSD syslogd like this:
> syslogd -a XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX
>
> But I see no
> This still doesn't entirely
Oops. I didn't finish that thought again after the vi -r.
I meant to say that even with a modifed kernel mount() call, there
are difficulties getting all of the configuration possibities into
the kernel propper. (Mount Options, What FS types to try, etc).
- St
Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>I plan to add a user ``smtp'' with UID 25 and a member of group
>``mail'', for use in running non-priveledged MTA's in FreeBSD.
I'd support this. I think the GID should be 25 as well.
David Wolfskill wrote:
>I think the overall idea is good, though my tendency has been to
On Fri, Sep 03, 1999 at 03:01:26AM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > The user would still have to know what type of filesystem is on
> > the volume. My code tries filesystem types from a list, one by
> > one, so the same command or desktop icon will mount a FAT, UFS, or
> > EXT2FS floppy, for
On 02-Sep-99 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Im currently using FreeBSD-3.2 stable. How do you get UDMA support working
> under FreeBSD? Do I need FreeBSD 4-Current?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Sam
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the
We have this for 586+ class machines:
CPU: Pentium/P54C (132.73-MHz 586-class CPU)
Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x52c Stepping=12
Features=0x1bf
Seems more precise and informative. For 386/486 based hardware
someone could adapt one of the numerous CPU speed detection routines
out there.
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> Nick Sayer wrote in list.freebsd-hackers:
> > Linux generates a meric of CPU performance as a byproduct of calibrating
> > a delay loop.
>
> It's not a metric of CPU performance. It's just a meaningless number,
> and its relation to the actual perform
Im currently using FreeBSD-3.2 stable. How do you get UDMA support working
under FreeBSD? Do I need FreeBSD 4-Current?
Thanks,
Sam
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Julian Elischer wrote:
> There was such a thing in 386BSD and FreeBSD1.0
>
> I certainly thing it was a worth-while thing.
> I'd try make the loop as similar to the Linux one so that they are
> comparable.
My vote is to make the number printed in parity with the number printe
> If we must have it, how about a port? - I'm definitely for the "this isn't a
> good idea" crowd, When I was using Linux, I thought it was 'cute'... I've
> grown up a bit since then...
Create /usr/ports/useless_linux_utils
Add this and code for making the keyboard lights blink in time to whateve
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 12:51:49PM -0400, Wayne Cuddy wrote:
> I had a configuration where I was logging from linux to linux which was
> working. Now I have replaced the logging system with FreeBSD 3.2.
>
> I started the FreeBSD syslogd like this:
> syslogd -a XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX
>
> But I see no
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999, Karl Pielorz wrote:
> Chris Costello wrote:
> >No, since it would just be useless bloat in the source tree.
>
> If we must have it, how about a port? - I'm definitely for the "this isn't a
> good idea" crowd, When I was using Linux, I thought it was 'cute'... I've
> grown
It was there... when I added the code to calibrate the
delay loops originally and added the DELAY
macro, it printed out the callibration factor..
(DELAY was originally a spin loop)
It wasn't called 'BOGOMIPS...'
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Nate Williams wrote:
> > There was such a thing in 386BSD an
Chris Costello wrote:
>
>No, since it would just be useless bloat in the source tree.
>
If we must have it, how about a port? - I'm definitely for the "this isn't a
good idea" crowd, When I was using Linux, I thought it was 'cute'... I've
grown up a bit since then...
-Kp
To Unsubscribe: s
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999, Nick Sayer wrote:
> Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
Yes, I would. The way I interpret it, along with "useless
blinking light", is as follows:
BogoMIPS is but the combination of "Bogus" and an acronym for
"Meaningless Indicator o
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999, Robert Sexton wrote:
> I'd have to agree with the "Lets be more professional" crowd.
>
> How about as a LINT option? "If you need something so banal, you can
> turn it on yourself"
No, since it would just be useless bloat in the source tree.
--
|Chris Costello
|Super
Sheldon Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I plan to add a user ``smtp'' with UID 25 and a member of group
>``mail'', for use in running non-priveledged MTA's in FreeBSD.
I'd support this. I think the GID should be 25 as well.
David Wolfskill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I think the overall idea
According to Vince Vielhaber:
> There was a patch posted on the freebsd.misc newsgroup the other day for
I re-posted the patch for people not running -STABLE yes.
> procfs that eliminates the need for the "hackery". It's supposed to be
> already in -current and I don't recall if it's supposed to
According to Mike Smith:
> If we do this, I hope a more obvious name is chosen; something like
> "mailman" might be a start. Or "mailperson", or "postperson", or
> whatever. "mta" just feels a little obscure.
"smtp", the first proposal is a better idea then. "mailman" (like it is used
on hub)
> There was such a thing in 386BSD and FreeBSD1.0
I remember no such thing doing a 'bogomips' to compare against Linux.
Certainly not in 386BSD.
Nate
>
> I certainly thing it was a worth-while thing.
> I'd try make the loop as similar to the Linux one so that they are
> comparable.
>
> On Th
As Nick Sayer wrote ...
> so long as
> they don't break anything in the process.
>
> I would like to generate a number that will hopefully be reasonably
> compatible with
> the one Linux spits out. The best method I have come up with is to have
> a similar
> (the same?) count down loop in assembl
We have this for 586+ class machines:
CPU: Pentium/P54C (132.73-MHz 586-class CPU)
Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x52c Stepping=12
Features=0x1bf
Seems more precise and informative. For 386/486 based hardware
someone could adapt one of the numerous CPU speed detection routines
out there.
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> Nick Sayer wrote in list.freebsd-hackers:
> > Linux generates a meric of CPU performance as a byproduct of calibrating
> > a delay loop.
>
> It's not a metric of CPU performance. It's just a meaningless number,
> and its relation to the actual perfor
Im currently using FreeBSD-3.2 stable. How do you get UDMA support working
under FreeBSD? Do I need FreeBSD 4-Current?
Thanks,
Sam
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
> If we must have it, how about a port? - I'm definitely for the "this isn't a
> good idea" crowd, When I was using Linux, I thought it was 'cute'... I've
> grown up a bit since then...
Create /usr/ports/useless_linux_utils
Add this and code for making the keyboard lights blink in time to whatev
Nick Sayer wrote in list.freebsd-hackers:
> Linux generates a meric of CPU performance as a byproduct of calibrating
> a delay loop.
It's not a metric of CPU performance. It's just a meaningless
number, and its relation to the actual performance of the
machine is very questionable.
> We don't
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999, Karl Pielorz wrote:
> Chris Costello wrote:
> >No, since it would just be useless bloat in the source tree.
>
> If we must have it, how about a port? - I'm definitely for the "this isn't a
> good idea" crowd, When I was using Linux, I thought it was 'cute'... I've
> grow
It was there... when I added the code to calibrate the
delay loops originally and added the DELAY
macro, it printed out the callibration factor..
(DELAY was originally a spin loop)
It wasn't called 'BOGOMIPS...'
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Nate Williams wrote:
> > There was such a thing in 386BSD a
Chris Costello wrote:
>
>No, since it would just be useless bloat in the source tree.
>
If we must have it, how about a port? - I'm definitely for the "this isn't a
good idea" crowd, When I was using Linux, I thought it was 'cute'... I've
grown up a bit since then...
-Kp
To Unsubscribe:
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999, Nick Sayer wrote:
> Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
Yes, I would. The way I interpret it, along with "useless
blinking light", is as follows:
BogoMIPS is but the combination of "Bogus" and an acronym for
"Meaningless Indicator
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999, Robert Sexton wrote:
> I'd have to agree with the "Lets be more professional" crowd.
>
> How about as a LINT option? "If you need something so banal, you can
> turn it on yourself"
No, since it would just be useless bloat in the source tree.
--
|Chris Costello <[EMAI
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 10:40:30AM -0700, Nick Sayer wrote:
> Linux generates a meric of CPU performance as a byproduct of calibrating
> a delay loop.
> We don't require doing any such thing, and so adding it would be purely
> cosmetic.
> However, I allege that cosmetic things aren't in and of them
According to Vince Vielhaber:
> There was a patch posted on the freebsd.misc newsgroup the other day for
I re-posted the patch for people not running -STABLE yes.
> procfs that eliminates the need for the "hackery". It's supposed to be
> already in -current and I don't recall if it's supposed t
According to Mike Smith:
> If we do this, I hope a more obvious name is chosen; something like
> "mailman" might be a start. Or "mailperson", or "postperson", or
> whatever. "mta" just feels a little obscure.
"smtp", the first proposal is a better idea then. "mailman" (like it is used
on hub)
> There was such a thing in 386BSD and FreeBSD1.0
I remember no such thing doing a 'bogomips' to compare against Linux.
Certainly not in 386BSD.
Nate
>
> I certainly thing it was a worth-while thing.
> I'd try make the loop as similar to the Linux one so that they are
> comparable.
>
> On T
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> jack wrote:
>
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 marcel marcel 72192512 Jul 23 11:47 so51_lnx_01.tar
> > > MD5 (so51_lnx_01.tar) = 347ffa68be6c1d7b89fd843591afb0d3
> >
> > so51a_lnx_01.tar
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 jacko user 70393856 Aug 31 15:47 so51a_lnx_01.tar
>
jack wrote:
>
> Today Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>
> > bro...@one-eyed-alien.net wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > >
> > > > SO5.1 installs OOTB on both -current and -stable. I suspect your
> > > > -stable is
> > > > not recent?
The fact that soffice runs setup aga
This is apparently old news, but I don't recall seeing anything about it
on the lists, and didn't hear about it until it hit Slashdot a short while
ago.
ftp://ftp.cs.berkeley.edu/pub/4bsd/README.Impt.License.Change:
July 22, 1999
To All Licensees, Distributors of Any Version of BSD:
As you know
As Nick Sayer wrote ...
> so long as
> they don't break anything in the process.
>
> I would like to generate a number that will hopefully be reasonably
> compatible with
> the one Linux spits out. The best method I have come up with is to have
> a similar
> (the same?) count down loop in assemb
"Andrew J. Korty" wrote:
> If it helps, I don't think you really need to unzip setup.zip. I
> found that setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. makes the setup program run
> just fine (because it actually does unzip setup.zip, but into a
> subdirectory of /tmp).
Exactly what I always needed to do. It can't f
> The user would still have to know what type of filesystem is on
> the volume. My code tries filesystem types from a list, one by
> one, so the same command or desktop icon will mount a FAT, UFS, or
> EXT2FS floppy, for example. The system administrator can also
> specify default mount options
Nick Sayer wrote in list.freebsd-hackers:
> Linux generates a meric of CPU performance as a byproduct of calibrating
> a delay loop.
It's not a metric of CPU performance. It's just a meaningless
number, and its relation to the actual performance of the
machine is very questionable.
> We don'
> Today Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>
> > bro...@one-eyed-alien.net wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > >
> > > > SO5.1 installs OOTB on both -current and -stable. I suspect your -stabl
> e is
> > > > not recent?
> > >
> > > Is this true for BOTH versions of the tarba
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 10:40:30AM -0700, Nick Sayer wrote:
> Linux generates a meric of CPU performance as a byproduct of calibrating
> a delay loop.
> We don't require doing any such thing, and so adding it would be purely
> cosmetic.
> However, I allege that cosmetic things aren't in and of the
> On Thu, Sep 02, 1999, Andrew J. Korty wrote:
>
> > > > You realise that this kind of stuff can be done in kernelspace,
> > > > without needing yet another setuid binary/binaries..
> > >
> > > Well, sysctl with list of pathes for user mounts looks good.
> > > Configuration is simple and can be
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> jack wrote:
>
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 marcel marcel 72192512 Jul 23 11:47 so51_lnx_01.tar
> > > MD5 (so51_lnx_01.tar) = 347ffa68be6c1d7b89fd843591afb0d3
> >
> > so51a_lnx_01.tar
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 jacko user 70393856 Aug 31 15:47 so51a_lnx_01.tar
>
jack wrote:
>
> Today Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > >
> > > > SO5.1 installs OOTB on both -current and -stable. I suspect your -stable is
> > > > not recent?
The fact that soffice runs setup again and again dep
This is apparently old news, but I don't recall seeing anything about it
on the lists, and didn't hear about it until it hit Slashdot a short while
ago.
ftp://ftp.cs.berkeley.edu/pub/4bsd/README.Impt.License.Change:
July 22, 1999
To All Licensees, Distributors of Any Version of BSD:
As you kno
>
>>
>> Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
>>
>
>I might. :-) Why exactly, except to keep up with the Linux kidz, do we need
>this? I recognize that this is solely a cosmetic change, but one of the
>things I hold over the heads of the Linux folks I deal wit
"Andrew J. Korty" wrote:
> If it helps, I don't think you really need to unzip setup.zip. I
> found that setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. makes the setup program run
> just fine (because it actually does unzip setup.zip, but into a
> subdirectory of /tmp).
Exactly what I always needed to do. It can't
There was such a thing in 386BSD and FreeBSD1.0
I certainly thing it was a worth-while thing.
I'd try make the loop as similar to the Linux one so that they are
comparable.
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Nick Sayer wrote:
> Linux generates a meric of CPU performance as a byproduct of calibrating
> a delay
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 10:40:30AM -0700, Nick Sayer wrote:
>
> Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
>
I might. :-) Why exactly, except to keep up with the Linux kidz, do we need
this? I recognize that this is solely a cosmetic change, but one of the
thing
> The user would still have to know what type of filesystem is on
> the volume. My code tries filesystem types from a list, one by
> one, so the same command or desktop icon will mount a FAT, UFS, or
> EXT2FS floppy, for example. The system administrator can also
> specify default mount options
> Today Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > >
> > > > SO5.1 installs OOTB on both -current and -stable. I suspect your -stabl
> e is
> > > > not recent?
> > >
> > > Is this true for BOTH versions of the tarball? Ch
> On Thu, Sep 02, 1999, Andrew J. Korty wrote:
>
> > > > You realise that this kind of stuff can be done in kernelspace,
> > > > without needing yet another setuid binary/binaries..
> > >
> > > Well, sysctl with list of pathes for user mounts looks good.
> > > Configuration is simple and can b
Linux generates a meric of CPU performance as a byproduct of calibrating
a delay loop.
We don't require doing any such thing, and so adding it would be purely
cosmetic.
However, I allege that cosmetic things aren't in and of themselves evil,
so long as
they don't break anything in the process.
I w
>
>>
>> Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
>>
>
>I might. :-) Why exactly, except to keep up with the Linux kidz, do we need
>this? I recognize that this is solely a cosmetic change, but one of the
>things I hold over the heads of the Linux folks I deal wi
There was such a thing in 386BSD and FreeBSD1.0
I certainly thing it was a worth-while thing.
I'd try make the loop as similar to the Linux one so that they are
comparable.
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Nick Sayer wrote:
> Linux generates a meric of CPU performance as a byproduct of calibrating
> a delay
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 10:40:30AM -0700, Nick Sayer wrote:
>
> Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
>
I might. :-) Why exactly, except to keep up with the Linux kidz, do we need
this? I recognize that this is solely a cosmetic change, but one of the
thin
jack wrote:
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 marcel marcel 72192512 Jul 23 11:47 so51_lnx_01.tar
> > MD5 (so51_lnx_01.tar) = 347ffa68be6c1d7b89fd843591afb0d3
>
> so51a_lnx_01.tar
> -rw-r--r-- 1 jacko user 70393856 Aug 31 15:47 so51a_lnx_01.tar
> (libs are all libxxx517x.so)
> requires jumping throught th
On Wed, 1 Sep 1999, Bill Fumerola wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Sep 1999, Luiz Morte da Costa Junior wrote:
>
> > > The onboard NIC works like any other Intel 10/100 using fxp0, adding a
> > > asecond nic makes the onboard fxp1 (for failover purposes, I assume)
> >
> > I think that I don't have problem wi
On Fri, 3 Sep 1999 adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
:Then all you need to do is think of a sane way to chown console devices
:(floppy, cdrom, etc..) to the user when they login? Perhaps an extension
:to login/xdm/whatever kde uses ?
You can do this in /etc/fbtab. You already chown the console for X
log
On Wed, 1 Sep 1999, Pete Mckenna wrote:
...
> > > I have also put an adaptec 2940 in them and it works as well.
> >
> > What is the adaptec transfer rate? I have tested with a adaptec 80Mb, and
> > it didn't work too. The chipset is the same the AIC 7896.
>
> I'm not sure what you are asking. I h
Today Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> bro...@one-eyed-alien.net wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> >
> > > SO5.1 installs OOTB on both -current and -stable. I suspect your -stable
> > > is
> > > not recent?
> >
> > Is this true for BOTH versions of the tarball? Changes whe
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999, Andrew J. Korty wrote:
> > > You realise that this kind of stuff can be done in kernelspace,
> > > without needing yet another setuid binary/binaries..
> >
> > Well, sysctl with list of pathes for user mounts looks good.
> > Configuration is simple and can be easliy chan
Linux generates a meric of CPU performance as a byproduct of calibrating
a delay loop.
We don't require doing any such thing, and so adding it would be purely
cosmetic.
However, I allege that cosmetic things aren't in and of themselves evil,
so long as
they don't break anything in the process.
I
> On Wed, 1 Sep 1999 adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 31, 1999, Doug Rabson wrote:
> > > On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Andrew J. Korty wrote:
> > >
> > > > I provided a solution via send-pr (bin/11031) over four months ago,
> > > > which is, in my opinion, superior in many ways to this sysctl
>
1 - 100 of 201 matches
Mail list logo
