I just bought a PCI sound card based on an ALS4000 chip. It seems to be
sound blaster compatible (port 0x220 irq 5 drq 1). Do I have a chance to
get the card working when modifying /usr/src/sys/dev/sound/isa/sbc.c in
such a way that the chip will be recognized in sound blaster mode during
pci
Hi,
I am trying to get AuDSL ( See http://www.araneus.fi/audsl/) to work
under FreeBSD. One major problem is that it requires both the read and write
channels of the soundcard to be mmap()-able. On 4.3-RELEASE, the following
comment can be found in sys/dev/sound/pcm/dsp.c :
/* XXX this is
On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 01:16:28PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
is BSDI's stack so superior to any of the other BSDs that MS would pay BSDI
for it, particularly at a time when BSDI was trying to compete with MS in the
server market? Seems like something that a bunch of BSD fanatics
Dag-Erling Smorgrav([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.06.17 07:48:27 +:
Rik van Riel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not quite. Linux distributions tend to be extremely
conservative in the IDE options (DMA, interrupt unmasking,
write caching, etc. all disabled) while FreeBSD seems to
have write
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 12:34:53PM +0200, Karsten W. Rohrbach wrote:
Dag-Erling Smorgrav([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.06.17 07:48:27 +:
Second, we tried turning write caching on ATA drives off by default,
and boy were you (the user community) pissed. Yes, turning wc off
shows you just
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 09:40:27AM +0200, Konrad Heuer wrote:
I just bought a PCI sound card based on an ALS4000 chip. It seems to be
sound blaster compatible (port 0x220 irq 5 drq 1). Do I have a chance to
get the card working when modifying /usr/src/sys/dev/sound/isa/sbc.c in
such a way
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 12:58:39PM +0200, Konrad Heuer wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Chris Faulhaber wrote:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 09:40:27AM +0200, Konrad Heuer wrote:
I just bought a PCI sound card based on an ALS4000 chip. It seems to be
sound blaster compatible (port 0x220 irq
Hi,
I'm trying to give the kernel (4.0-RELEASE) 2Gb of memory to work with. I
can afford to have 4Gb of physical memory on one of my servers, and hence
the experiments.
Is it safe to play around with KERNBASE, and get away without breaking
code ? Is there any other advisable method if this one
David Preece([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.06.18 12:03:09 +:
Hi,
Due to the wonder of IPFW and divert sockets I have been merrily catching
packets, modifying them and reinjecting back in from userland to great
effect for some time now. What I would like (need) to do is much the same,
but
Hmm, anyone seen this then in the Wall Street J ??
Or is this what started this thread (if so I musta
missed one somewhere along the line).
Ak
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Josef Karthauser
Sent: 18 June 2001 11:17
To: [EMAIL
jeez, forgot the link to WSJ
http://public.wsj.com/news/hmc/sb992819157437237260.htm
If this is what started this forgive me for being
so unobservent, we're a bit slow here in the UK
sometimes (well I am that is!)
Ak
Hmm, anyone seen this then in the Wall Street J ??
Or is this what
In a message dated 06/17/2001 2:27:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
2. We're not bashing Microsoft here. We're just trying to figure
out if their recently published comments that Open Source is bad
and inimical to our interests is really just marketspeak which
While I didn't read the article (I saw it when someone was reading
the opposite page on the subway today), I thought it might make
for some interesting conversation and views on the list. I will
try and get a URL for you all to look at later. Thanks.
-- Jonathan
--
Jonathan M. Slivko [EMAIL
Dear James,
I had a mergemaster problem a while back, but I haven't debugged it
properly. I had my /etc/ppp symlinked into /home/root/ppp. Then, after a
mergemaster run I ended up with a file named /etc/ppp, which had the
contents of the new version of /etc/ppp/ppp.conf.
This box used to dial
Jonathan Slivko wrote:
While I didn't read the article (I saw it when someone was reading
the opposite page on the subway today), I thought it might make
for some interesting conversation and views on the list. I will
try and get a URL for you all to look at later. Thanks.
-- Jonathan
Like I posted eariler..
http://public.wsj.com/news/hmc/sb992819157437237260.htm
Regards
Ak
While I didn't read the article (I saw it when someone was reading
the opposite page on the subway today), I thought it might make
for some interesting conversation and views on the list. I will
http://public.wsj.com/news/hmc/sb992819157437237260.htm
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Jonathan Slivko wrote:
While I didn't read the article (I saw it when someone was reading
the opposite page on the subway today), I thought it might make
for some interesting conversation and views on the list. I
Dear Karsten,
Definition of Windows 95: A 32-bit extension and graphical
shell for a 16 Bit patch to an 8 Bit OS originally coded
for an 4 Bit CPU, written by a 2-Bit Company that can't
stand 1 Bit of competition.
That would make Windows 2000 the 64-bit sauce on the 32-bit extension
:
:http://public.wsj.com/news/hmc/sb992819157437237260.htm
Ahhh very nice. BSD is more viral then GPL it would seem :-) It
will be interesting to see if MS now tries to rewrite TCP/IP. I got
dibs on the front row aisle seat! Where's the popcorn?
I'm not sure if this will help or not but Winsock.h, Winsock2.h, and Ws2spi.h
which are shipped with visual studio 6 include the following in the header:
* This file includes parts which are Copyright (c) 1982-1986 Regents
* of the University of California. All rights reserved. The
*
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Matt Dillon wrote:
:http://public.wsj.com/news/hmc/sb992819157437237260.htm
Ahhh very nice. BSD is more viral then GPL it would seem :-) It
will be interesting to see if MS now tries to rewrite TCP/IP. I got
dibs on the front row aisle seat!
As I understand the BSD license anyone can use it, however, they must say
that they are using it, no? So if MS is using TCP/IP code (or any other
code from FreeBSD), are they not in violation of the license by not
including such a clause in their license or documentation? What am I
missing
On Sat, 19 May 2001, Huff wrote:
I can't get XFree86 to work. Using /stand/sysinstall I use the script
and configure everything manually to the best of my knowledge. I can't
find any specs on the monitor I'm using (The Monitor is from the
Toshiba Infinia 7200) so I'm not sure of the
Sort of the other way around. We were the several FreeBSD
volunteers referenced in the article. Lee's my press contact at the
WSJ and he's done a number of pieces favorable to us in the past.
Again, I'd like to thank the various folks on -hackers who responded
(you know who you are) and were a
+ Matthew Hagerty wrote:
| As I understand the BSD license anyone can use it, however, they must say
| that they are using it, no? So if MS is using TCP/IP code (or any other
| code from FreeBSD), are they not in violation of the license by not
| including such a clause in their license
+ Adam wrote:
| I'm not sure if this will help or not but Winsock.h, Winsock2.h, and Ws2spi.h
| which are shipped with visual studio 6 include the following in the header:
|
| * This file includes parts which are Copyright (c) 1982-1986 Regents
| * of the University of California. All
From: Matthew Hagerty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Anyone see todays Wall Street Journal article: Microsoft Using Free
Software (or something to that effect)
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 12:43:24 -0400
As I understand the BSD license anyone can use it, however, they must say
that they are using
:Hi,
:
:I'm trying to give the kernel (4.0-RELEASE) 2Gb of memory to work with. I
:can afford to have 4Gb of physical memory on one of my servers, and hence
:the experiments.
:
:Is it safe to play around with KERNBASE, and get away without breaking
:code ? Is there any other advisable method if
:Hi,
:
:I'm trying to give the kernel (4.0-RELEASE) 2Gb of memory to work with. I
:can afford to have 4Gb of physical memory on one of my servers, and hence
:the experiments.
:
:Is it safe to play around with KERNBASE, and get away without breaking
:code ? Is there any other advisable method if
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Matt Dillon wrote:
:
:http://public.wsj.com/news/hmc/sb992819157437237260.htm
Ahhh very nice. BSD is more viral then GPL it would seem :-) It
will be interesting to see if MS now tries to rewrite TCP/IP. I got
dibs on the front row aisle seat!
On Monday 18 June 2001 17:04, Koster, K.J. wrote:
I had a mergemaster problem a while back, but I haven't debugged it
properly. I had my /etc/ppp symlinked into /home/root/ppp. Then, after a
mergemaster run I ended up with a file named /etc/ppp, which had the
contents of the new version of
[Please follow up on this discussion in -arch]
Gang,
Several people are leaping into the fray with enthusiasm for this
project all of a sudden, which is a good thing. However, I'm a little
concerned that it's not getting enough of a big picture view. What may
seem like lack of progress
Matt Dillon wrote:
: But this isn't true at all. How many people need to make thousands
: or tens of thousands of simultanious connections to a machine out of the
: box? Almost nobody. So to run a benchmark and have it hit these
:
:You are essentially saying: out primary
It's a lot faster on writes with softupdates enabled. FreeBSD will also
have journaling filesystems soon. Either way, this was not a very good
benchmark.
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Rayson Ho wrote:
But how much tuning is needed? You can download a kernel patch for VM,
another kernel patch for FS...
Josef Karthauser wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 01:16:28PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
is BSDI's stack so superior to any of the other BSDs that MS would pay BSDI
for it, particularly at a time when BSDI was trying to compete with MS in the
server market? Seems like something that a
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Attila Nagy wrote:
I have a mid-loaded server which runs each daemon in jail()-ed
environments. The data space is union-mounted, because nullfs paniced the
kernel when someting did a chroot on it (this was the case with
4.2-STABLE).
On friday I upgraded from 4.3-RC
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Doug Barton writes:
: A) Examine what we have (most of us understand that pretty well)
: B) Figure out what we need (in progress, nowhere near done yet)
: C) Take a hard look at NetBSD's code to determine if it meets our needs
: D) If we decide C) is yes, figure out
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Matt Dillon wrote:
DG changed KERNBASE a while back to reserve a gigabyte of VM for the
kernel. This should be sufficient on a 4G machine but it depends where
your resources are going. If your server's resources are user-process
centric then you don't
:An associated question: along with this, changing the kernel to use only
:PDEs should be better for TLB performance. Mapping 4Mb at a time would
:definitely be much better than 4k. I'm talking of having the entire kernel
:(at least the code) find mappings in the TLB, and keeping 4Mb mappings
39 matches
Mail list logo
