On 8/21/2012 10:11 AM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org writes:
Dag-Erling, do you have a timeline for getting started on the
ldns/unbound import?
I imported the code into the vendor tree, but did not proceed any
further
On 8/21/2012 11:08 AM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
Neither importing ldns nor removing BIND is going to have any effect on
the stub resolver library in libc.
Yes it does as if we are not carefull, we'll neither have a _proper_
validating caching resolver
On 08/06/2012 13:23, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/07/2012 16:33, Garrett Wollman wrote:
The utilities (specifically host(1) and dig(1)) are the only
user-visible interfaces I care about.
[...]
ldns (a dependency of unbound) comes with drill, which is a dig
question from
removing BIND. Not only do I not see any reason not to move forward on
the former, I think that once people see a solid implementation in place
already it will ease the fears about removing BIND.
Doug
--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something
On 08/20/2012 02:16, Mark Blackman wrote:
On 20 Aug 2012, at 10:12, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 08/20/2012 01:55, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
We will continue to reject this until there are more firm plans,
proper documentation on the security support side, which I cannot
remember
On 08/20/2012 02:19, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
On 08/20/2012 01:55, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
We will continue to reject this until there are more firm plans,
proper documentation on the security support side, which I cannot
remember Simon got an answer
On 07/31/2012 17:02, Yuri wrote:
One of my 9.1-BETA1 systems periodically freezes. If sound was playing,
it would usually cycle with a very short period. And system stops being
sensitive to keyboard/mouse. Also ping of this system doesn't get a
response.
Just for fun, have you tried switching
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/31/2012 09:48, Fabian Keil wrote:
I think guessing that INET and INET6 are available is a lot more
reasonable than doing the same for the external NFS modules.
FYI, there has been considerable work done to ensure that INET6 works
without
On 08/02/2012 12:18, David Chisnall wrote:
Thank you for your thoughtful reply,
You too ... I let some time go by to see what others had to say. I think
it's disappointing that more people aren't concerned about this issue.
On 2 Aug 2012, at 19:33, Doug Barton wrote:
However, my point
On 08/02/2012 09:20, Scott Long wrote:
On Aug 2, 2012, at 12:23 AM, Kevin Oberman kob6...@gmail.com
wrote:
Doug makes some good points.
No, he doesn't.
Yes I do! (So there)
He and Arnould being argumentative and accusatory
where none of that is warranted.
I used to run
On 08/02/2012 05:54, David Chisnall wrote:
On 2 Aug 2012, at 05:30, Doug Barton wrote:
I used to ask the PTB to provide *some* form of remote
participation for even a fraction of the events at the dev summit.
I don't bother asking anymore because year after year my requests
were met
thing aside.
At various points when I was asking for remote participation at BSDCAN
different people offered to provide this through their company's
teleconferencing solutions, providing that the organizers could put a
phone line in the room(s). They were told that it wasn't possible to do
that.
Doug
On 08/02/2012 10:13, David Chisnall wrote:
On 2 Aug 2012, at 17:46, Doug Barton wrote:
Well that's a start. :) And where was this availability announced?
If I missed it, that's on me. But providing remote access that you
don't tell people about isn't really any better than not providing
BTW, for those who'd like to get a flavor of what the IETF model looks
like, the Vancouver meeting is in process now:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/84/agenda.html
Feel free to join in as a lurker.
--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something.
On 08/02/2012 10:34, Doug Barton wrote:
BTW, for those who'd like to get a flavor of what the IETF model looks
like, the Vancouver meeting is in process now:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/84/agenda.html
Feel free to join in as a lurker.
Sorry, this agenda makes it easier to see
core
team member.
Doug
--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something. And I will not let what I cannot do interfere with what
I can do.
-- Edward Everett Hale, (1822 - 1909
benefit a lot of
people, especially in comparison to the money set aside for travel
grants which is now going begging.
Doug
--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something. And I will not let what I cannot do interfere with what
I can do
was that BSDCan is far cheaper).
Yep, back in 2004 when traveling to conferences was part of my job, and
before my daughter was born. My life now is quite different.
... not to mention that this thread isn't about me. It's about the
importance of remote participation to the FreeBSD community as a whole.
Doug
, and an attempt to focus the
discussion on me. Neither is helpful. :) Acknowledging that this is a
problem that needs to be solved does not imply that by not solving it
you personally have failed in some way. I apologize if anything I've
written so far has implied otherwise.
Doug
--
I am only one, but I
ever participated in is FreeBSD,
what gets done around here feels normal to you. But don't be so quick
to dismiss the viewpoints of people who have experience in the wider world.
Doug
--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something. And I will not let what I
The xhci code in 8-stable works, but it's not mentioned in the NOTES
files in sys/conf, sys/i386/conf, or sys/amd64/conf. The module is
hooked up in sys/modules/usb/Makefile, and that's how I've been using it
so far. Is it not possible to compile this code into the kernel?
Doug
--
Change
On 07/19/2012 02:17, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2012 11:14:42 Doug Barton wrote:
The xhci code in 8-stable works, but it's not mentioned in the NOTES
files in sys/conf, sys/i386/conf, or sys/amd64/conf. The module is
hooked up in sys/modules/usb/Makefile, and that's how
On 07/19/2012 03:29, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2012 11:38:11 Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/19/2012 02:17, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2012 11:14:42 Doug Barton wrote:
The xhci code in 8-stable works, but it's not mentioned in the NOTES
files in sys/conf, sys
) often helps clarify both the actual proposed design, and the
current state of things. It's a shame that we don't have a culture that
not only encourages this, but requires it. However, we don't; and aren't
ever likely to.
Doug
___
freebsd-hackers
On 07/17/2012 03:38 PM, Dave Hayes wrote:
On 07/17/12 15:14, Doug Barton wrote:
Some sources of this are: I rarely read the handbook
So now that we've discussed *our* shortcomings, let's discuss yours. :)
Read the handbook. Seriously.
I should have written that better. I *do* read
On 07/15/2012 02:39, Mike Meyer wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jul 2012 13:29:59 -0700
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
For the OP, make sure you have the latest BIOS. I had a similar problem
with vt-x and it was solved by a later BIOS upgrade.
And *that* solved the problem. The performance
For the OP, make sure you have the latest BIOS. I had a similar problem
with vt-x and it was solved by a later BIOS upgrade.
hth,
Doug
--
Change is hard.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo
that. I think you misunderstood my flippant
comment below.
On 2012-Jul-09 13:52:15 -0700, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/09/2012 13:47, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2012-Jul-09 14:15:13 +0200, in freebsd-security, Andrej (Andy)
Brodnik and...@brodnik.org wrote:
Excuse my ignorance
On 07/09/2012 14:47, Mark Blackman wrote:
I never use '-t' with dig. drill *told* me I should use '-t'
then completely failed to acknowledge I had done so.
Have you reported this bug?
--
Change is hard.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/09/2012 19:56, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2012-Jul-10 00:40:07 +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no
wrote:
They are sufficiently similar that writing a wrapper that
supports a significant subset of dig's command-line option and
uses drill
On 07/09/2012 16:45, George Mitchell wrote:
On 07/09/12 17:01, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/09/2012 06:45, Mark Blackman wrote:
Indeed, 'dig' and 'host' must be present and working as expected
in a minimally installed system.
So if you don't like the versions that get imported, install bind
that with other solutions, but this
is one area where the fact that BIND can do both is a feature.
Doug
--
Change is hard.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any
On 7/10/2012 4:27 AM, Mark Blackman wrote:
On 10 Jul 2012, at 08:12, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/09/2012 14:47, Mark Blackman wrote:
I never use '-t' with dig. drill *told* me I should use '-t'
then completely failed to acknowledge I had done so.
Have you reported this bug?
Nope, you?
I'm
On 07/08/2012 23:16, Avleen Vig wrote:
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/08/2012 22:43, Avleen Vig wrote:
It would be silly not to keep bind-tools in base.
Sounds easy, but not so much in practice. Keeping any of the code
doesn't solve the problem
On 07/09/2012 00:34, Avleen Vig wrote:
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/08/2012 23:16, Avleen Vig wrote:
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/08/2012 22:43, Avleen Vig wrote:
It would be silly not to keep bind
.
Doug
- --
This .signature sanitized for your protection
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJP+0R/AAoJEFzGhvEaGryECuQIAM2CtwjuYZPpQHYojU93mF7g
ZLmTqmo8cdunpRUc66hHEirqnmnZ58LkosOugbuTgNvWAB9H2NOo25rFKkft3k0q
S+5hSqS442NNvEYrsOlBhdPlP
- to lower the barrier to
entry.
Right.
We should also change the base system to remove the most commonly used
tools for doing DNS lookups, to what was the reason again?
It's been covered at length in this thread.
We get it, change is hard.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your
On 07/09/2012 06:45, Mark Blackman wrote:
Indeed, 'dig' and 'host' must be present and working as expected
in a minimally installed system.
So if you don't like the versions that get imported, install bind-tools
from ports.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
On 07/07/2012 19:44, Warner Losh wrote:
On Jul 7, 2012, at 5:33 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 16:17:53 -0700, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org said:
BIND in the base today comes with a full-featured local resolver
configuration, which I'm confident that Dag-Erling can do
On 07/08/2012 01:03, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 8. Jul 2012, at 02:44 , Warner Losh wrote:
On Jul 7, 2012, at 5:33 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 16:17:53 -0700, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org said:
BIND in the base today comes with a full-featured local resolver
On 07/08/2012 01:07, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 7. Jul 2012, at 23:45 , Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/07/2012 16:34, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 7. Jul 2012, at 23:17 , Doug Barton wrote:
Other than authoritative DNS, what features does unbound lack that you
want?
DNS64 as a start.
Personally
.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
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 07/07/2012 17:47, Darren Pilgrim wrote:
On 2012-07-07 16:45, Doug Barton wrote:
Also re DNSSEC integration in the base, I've stated before that I
believe very strongly that any kind of hard-coding of trust anchors as
part of the base resolver setup is a bad idea, and should not be done.
We
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/08/2012 10:10, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
From first impression it seems that drill(1) has a syntax that
leaves something to be desired like the eased use of host or dig.
So once again, if you need the exact capabilities of ISC host and dig,
On 07/08/2012 10:43, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 02:31:17 -0700, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org said:
Neither of which has any relevance to the actual root zone ZSK, which
could require an emergency roll tomorrow.
Surely that's why there's a separate KSK. The ZSK can
On 07/08/2012 13:25, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
On 2012.07.08. 1:17, Doug Barton wrote:
Other than authoritative DNS, what features does unbound lack that you
want?
[Picking up a random mail from the thread.]
Other than the functionality, when we replace something, it is also
important to do
On 07/08/2012 07:41, Dan Lukes wrote:
The ideal, long-term solution is to re-think what The Base is, and
give users more flexibility at install time.
Flexibility is double-edged sword.
Feel free to replace one resolver with another resolver (but don't do it
so often, please). Applications
On 07/08/2012 22:43, Avleen Vig wrote:
It would be silly not to keep bind-tools in base.
Sounds easy, but not so much in practice. Keeping any of the code
doesn't solve the problem of the release cycles not syncing up. And for
the vast majority of users needs the tools we will import will be
On 07/07/2012 14:16, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 3. Jul 2012, at 12:39 , Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org writes:
The correct solution to this problem is to remove BIND from the base
altogether, but I have no energy for all the whinging that would happen
if I tried
On 07/07/2012 16:33, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 16:17:53 -0700, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org said:
BIND in the base today comes with a full-featured local resolver
configuration, which I'm confident that Dag-Erling can do for unbound
(and which I would be glad to assist
On 07/07/2012 16:34, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 7. Jul 2012, at 23:17 , Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/07/2012 14:16, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On 3. Jul 2012, at 12:39 , Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org writes:
The correct solution to this problem is to remove BIND from
they wouldn't want
to use it, but I haven't seen anything yet that says having this
feature is a universally bad idea.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org
On 07/04/2012 10:01, Freddie Cash wrote:
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Simon L. B. Nielsen si...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/03/2012 05:39, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org writes:
The correct solution
this feature, which is pretty much universal in
linux at this point. It's very handy.
I look forward to reviewing your patches to implement it. :)
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http
about with/without $option you are
talking about a ports install, which is perfectly fine.
Other than that, if whoever actually pushes all the rocks uphill to make
the installer more modular in this regard decides to include djbdns,
more power to them. :)
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized
On 07/04/2012 15:01, Mike Meyer wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 14:19:38 -0700
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 07/04/2012 11:51, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
What would be really nice here is a command wrapper hooked into the
shell so that when you type a command and it does not exist
On 07/04/2012 15:55, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
Seeing as sudo plays a big part of this
No ... not only is sudo not a necessary component, it shouldn't be
involved at all. The feature works on debian/ubuntu for regular
userspace commands.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your
On 07/04/2012 15:57, Yuri wrote:
On 07/04/2012 15:08, Doug Barton wrote:
First, I agree that being able to turn it off should be possible. But I
can't help being curious ... why would you *not* want a feature that
tells you what to install if you type a command that doesn't exist
On 07/04/2012 16:41, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 03:59:29PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/04/2012 15:55, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
Seeing as sudo plays a big part of this
No ... not only is sudo not a necessary component, it shouldn't be
involved at all. The feature
On 07/04/2012 17:30, Tim Kientzle wrote:
On Jul 4, 2012, at 4:41 PM, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 03:59:29PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/04/2012 15:55, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
Seeing as sudo plays a big part of this
No ... not only is sudo not a necessary component
On 07/04/2012 21:08, Brett Glass wrote:
At 04:03 PM 7/4/2012, Doug Barton wrote:
Other than that, if whoever actually pushes all the rocks uphill to make
the installer more modular in this regard decides to include djbdns,
more power to them. :)
I'm not suggesting that everyone
BIND from the base
altogether, but I have no energy for all the whinging that would happen
if I tried (again) to do that.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org
On 07/03/2012 05:39, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org writes:
The correct solution to this problem is to remove BIND from the base
altogether, but I have no energy for all the whinging that would happen
if I tried (again) to do that.
I don't think
important over
time as DNSSEC adoption increases, and more things begin to use it (like
DANE).
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd
.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
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 07/02/2012 09:25, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012, David Wolfskill wrote:
Huh??!?
At least as far back as 06 Jan (based on the mtime of /etc/src.conf), I
had set up src.conf to read:
PORTS_MODULES=x11/nvidia-driver
Don't do that.
PORTS_MODULES is documented to belong in
The problem is fixed now. This time I tested build and install with the
same code. :(
Sorry for the breakage,
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
On 07/02/2012 13:41, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/02/2012 09:25, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012, David Wolfskill wrote:
Huh??!?
At least as far back as 06 Jan (based on the mtime of /etc/src.conf), I
had set up src.conf to read
things we need in addition to booting faster.
To that end I like the direction that the thread is going in terms of
discussing what a new system should have. I have some thoughts about
that, but I'd like to let others talk for a while first.
Doug
___
freebsd
.
Doug
On 06/20/2012 12:39 AM, Mark Linimon wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:45:13PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
That is already done in Gentoo FreeBSD, or do you want me to do the
work for you to integrate OpenRC in the base system?
We want you to do the work to prove that it is an improvement
solutions where there is a
good reason to wait for a dependent service to actually be running.
This also brings up a good point, any new rc-alike solution we consider
must have support for scripts in ports that is at least as robust as
what we have now.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized
On 6/18/2012 4:05 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
Doug, we already have OpenRC implemented. You can install Gentoo FreeBSD
in a jail, install regular FreeBSD in another jail and do your own
performance comparisons.
Bt! Thanks for playing. :) You're the one proposing the change,
YOU get to do
making the boot time
faster.
But, I'm willing to be proven wrong by someone who actually _implements_
one of these systems and can demonstrate, in a statistically rigorous
fashion, how much the boot time is improved.
Doug
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
On 06/15/2012 11:37, rank1see...@gmail.com wrote:
*** The following files exist in /etc/rc.d but not in
/var/tmp/temproot/etc/rc.d/:
sshd
man src.conf, and search for SSH. You have one of those options defined
in your environment.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your
On 06/13/2012 06:50 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 09/06/2012 19:17 Doug Barton said the following:
If this were a problem we didn't already have a solution for, I'd be
much more interested in what you're proposing.
I wonder if you were in the same mindset when you worked on service(8
On 06/07/2012 11:10, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 07/06/2012 17:29 Doug Barton said the following:
On 06/07/2012 02:57 AM, Gleb Kurtsou wrote:
What do you think about adding generic support for overriding *_enable
options in rc.conf?
I'd like to be able to disable services at boot prompt, e.g
On 06/07/2012 02:57 AM, Gleb Kurtsou wrote:
What do you think about adding generic support for overriding *_enable
options in rc.conf?
I'd like to be able to disable services at boot prompt, e.g.
# set rc.slim_enable=no -- overrides slim_enable=yes in rc.conf
Similarly rc.pf_enable=no
to always work.
b) There were problems after the cons25 - xterm conversion that have
almost all been fixed nowadays
c) Try using a simpler shell, like /bin/sh, or even /rescue/sh
d) Obviously don't try to do SUM with a shell that is not compiled static
hth,
Doug
As someone pointed out when this thread started, it's off-topic for
hackers. Please take it to advocacy.
--
It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :)
will test a patch to change that to echo'ing
something useful to stdout instead unless anyone has an objection.
Don't expect the result soon though, super, super, super busy with
work/life/etc. atm. And as John pointed out, it's been there for a while. :)
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized
to a directory. So
then it is easy to build something, toss it into a directory, start
qemu and test.
Thanks,
Doug A.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail
both the OP
and the community at large.
Doug
___
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
Eric McCorkle writes:
| On 04/03/12 13:22, Doug Ambrisko wrote:
| EFI is a good task. For generic PC's we need an X64 format. The current
| version in FreeBSD is IA32 format. The X64 can boot i386/amd64.
| Qemu can be used to test both IA32 and X64 formats. I added some
| notes about
testing a newer
version. 8.2 came out over a year ago, many many things have changed
since then.
Doug
So you're saying that he should have been using 8.3-RELEASE, then.
That isn't what I said at all, sorry if I wasn't clear. The OP mentioned
9.0-RELEASE, and in the context of his message
interacted with.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
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
changed
since then.
Doug
___
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
over a year ago, many many things have changed
since then.
Doug
So you're saying that he should have been using 8.3-RELEASE, then.
That isn't what I said at all, sorry if I wasn't clear. The OP mentioned
9.0-RELEASE, and in the context of his message (which I snipped) he
mentioned 8-stable
-net@. Second, according to
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1122 that RFC has been updated quite a
bit over the last 23 years. Have you followed that chain upwards to make
sure that your concerns are still valid?
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
going into /usr/bin, not
sbin.
That's not the dividing line, please read hier(7). This should be
introduced as a port in /usr/local/sbin to start with, and then we'll
see how it goes from there.
Doug
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http
On 03/02/2012 08:52, John Baldwin wrote:
On Thursday, March 01, 2012 5:23:11 pm Doug Barton wrote:
On 3/1/2012 1:14 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
My firefox on my BSD desktop was caching the image.
Holding down Shift when clicking reload usually handles this.
Only if you already know that FF
| + */
| +if (!resource_disabled(acpi, 0))
| + return;
| +/*
| * BIOS32 Service Directory, PCI BIOS
| */
|
That seems reasonable to me.
Doug A.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo
On 3/1/2012 1:14 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
My firefox on my BSD desktop was caching the image.
Holding down Shift when clicking reload usually handles this.
hth,
Doug
--
It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
Breadth of IT experience, and depth
On 02/23/2012 05:22, John Baldwin wrote:
On Wednesday, February 22, 2012 9:59:02 pm Doug Barton wrote:
On 02/22/2012 01:42, Ivan Voras wrote:
The Dragonfly team has recently liberated their VM from the giant lock and
there are some interesting benchmarks comparing it to FreeBSD 9
.html
Other developments are described in their release notes:
http://www.dragonflybsd.org/release30/
The 4.5 times improvement by enabling kern.ipc.shm_use_phys is pretty
notable, what prevents us from enabling that by default?
Doug
--
It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit
On 02/21/2012 02:49, Tom Evans wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 02/20/2012 06:44, Tom Evans wrote:
Whatever happened to POLA? This change surprised me, wasn't mentioned
in /usr/src/UPDATING,
You're supposed to compare your existing kernel config
On 02/20/2012 08:54, Alex Goncharov wrote:
,--- You/Tom (Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:44:09 +) *
| On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:14 AM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
| Because loading modules through loader.conf is
| veeryy slooww I added an rc.d script called
? This change surprised me, wasn't mentioned
in /usr/src/UPDATING,
You're supposed to compare your existing kernel config to the new
GENERIC every time you do a major version upgrade. That would have made
the change quite obvious.
Doug
--
It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short
On 02/20/2012 07:23, Patrick Powell wrote:
Oooh! Ahhh! Just what I was looking for. l will extract this from 9
and put it on my system.
Glad you like it. :) One thing though, you're actually better off
updating to the latest -stable of whatever branch you're using, some
work has gone into
On 02/19/2012 08:13, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Given the context of the thread, this:
loading modules through loader.conf is
veeryy slooww ...
seemed to be an objection to modularizing the kernel.
The only way you could come to that conclusion is if you
On 02/18/2012 10:43, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
loading modules through loader.conf is
veeryy slooww ...
Is it noticeably slower to load (say) a 6MB kernel + 2MB of
modules than to load an 8MB kernel?
I don't know
1 - 100 of 1133 matches
Mail list logo
