Snippet from David Christensen dpchr...@holgerdanske.com:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2012-March/239742.html
It looks like -STABLE are daily development/ test builds (?):
ftp://ftp.allbsd.org/pub/FreeBSD-snapshots/amd64-amd64/
I'm looking for stability. I'll try
On 06/07/2012 06:40 PM, Daniel Staal wrote:
On 06/08/2012 01:07 AM, Thomas Mueller wrote:
Thanks for the replies. :-)
David
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe,
On 06/06/2012 08:33 PM, Thomas Mueller wrote:
This looks like the processor I have, I think you would use amd64. Almost
certainly your system is 64-bit as opposed to 32-bit.
Thanks for the reply. :-)
Yes, definitely 64-bit.
For a new computer, I wouldn't go with anything earlier than
--As of June 7, 2012 3:30:52 PM -0700, David Christensen is alleged to have
said:
For a new computer, I wouldn't go with anything earlier than FreeBSD
9.0, and in my case, upgrading to 9.0-STABLE proved stabler than the 9.0
release.
STFW:
freebsd-questions:
I have a new computer with an Intel i7-2600S processor and DQ67SWB3
motherboard that I'd like to run with ZFS, virtual machine host,
desktop, Samba, and terminal server (on second NIC).
Can this be done with FreeBSD; if so, which distribution and
ports/packages do I need?
- Original Message -
From: David Christensen dpchr...@holgerdanske.com
I have a new computer with an Intel i7-2600S processor and DQ67SWB3
motherboard that I'd like to run with ZFS, virtual machine host,
desktop, Samba, and terminal server (on second NIC).
Can this be done with
Which version and GUI will work best on the internet with my AT Pentium II
350MHz x86-based PC? Some web sites require Flash Player 8 or higher, and some
require 128-bit encryption I think, but doesn't 40-bit encryption process data
3 times faster? How many bit encryption is the various
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 23:54:38 -0800, Harry Veltman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which version and GUI will work best on the internet with my
AT Pentium II 350MHz x86-based PC?
Allthough the FreeBSD base system gets better and faster in each
version, the additional software and the GUI toolkits that
On Monday 01 December 2008 11:36:58 Polytropon wrote:
I can't answer your question regarding Flash and encryption;
sadly, I never saw any need for this.
Even if you get the software to work (which is a project in itself),
performance will be very very bad.
My parents have a similar machine
We have a few oldies, just installed KDE 3.5 on a:
CPU: VIA Nehemiah (997.17-MHz 686-class CPU)
Origin = CentaurHauls Id = 0x698 Stepping = 8
Oldie @ 1 GHz? You must be joking. I'd bite my hand off for
such hardware. :-)
well most of machines i use are 1Ghz and 512MB RAM.
no need for
We have a few oldies, just installed KDE 3.5 on a:
CPU: VIA Nehemiah (997.17-MHz 686-class CPU)
Origin = CentaurHauls Id = 0x698 Stepping = 8
That's pretty much as low as I'd go for normal desktop usage. The machine
you're describing, still makes for a good router or LAN resolver with low
On Monday 01 December 2008 02:11:13 Polytropon wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 11:53:11 +0100, Mel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
We have a few oldies, just installed KDE 3.5 on a:
CPU: VIA Nehemiah (997.17-MHz 686-class CPU)
Origin = CentaurHauls Id = 0x698 Stepping = 8
Oldie @ 1 GHz? You must
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 11:53:11 +0100, Mel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have a few oldies, just installed KDE 3.5 on a:
CPU: VIA Nehemiah (997.17-MHz 686-class CPU)
Origin = CentaurHauls Id = 0x698 Stepping = 8
Oldie @ 1 GHz? You must be joking. I'd bite my hand off for
such hardware. :-)
On Monday 01 December 2008 12:19:50 Wojciech Puchar wrote:
We have a few oldies, just installed KDE 3.5 on a:
CPU: VIA Nehemiah (997.17-MHz 686-class CPU)
Origin = CentaurHauls Id = 0x698 Stepping = 8
That's pretty much as low as I'd go for normal desktop usage. The machine
you're
since OP already stated to want flash 8 with highbit encryption, you will
need firefox and bunch of gstreamer-*/gnome stuff or linux emulation and a
lot of good fortune when going with pluginwrapper.
but not KDE and Gnome desktop running. firefox is quite fast compared to
it
On Monday 01 December 2008 12:11:13 Polytropon wrote:
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 11:53:11 +0100, Mel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
We have a few oldies, just installed KDE 3.5 on a:
CPU: VIA Nehemiah (997.17-MHz 686-class CPU)
Origin = CentaurHauls Id = 0x698 Stepping = 8
Oldie @ 1 GHz? You must
hi...
Which version and GUI will work best on the internet with my AT
Pentium II 350MHz x86-based PC? Some web sites require Flash Player 8
or higher, and some require 128-bit encryption I think, but doesn't
40-bit encryption process data 3 times faster? How many bit
encryption is the
too... my absolute favorite and it boosted my productivity (after 2
weeks of configuringcustomizing) to a level no other GUI in this world
no other you tried.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 23:54:38 -0800
Harry Veltman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which version and GUI will work best on the internet with my AT
Pentium II 350MHz x86-based PC? Some web sites require Flash Player
8 or higher,
If flash is important to you then I'd suggest you run windows firefox
If flash is important to you then I'd suggest you run windows firefox
under wine. Native Adobe Flash support is apparently working again in
isn't better to run windows ?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Oldie @ 1 GHz? You must be joking. I'd bite my hand off for
such hardware. :-)
No need. Get a job at a computer service store, like my fiancee. You will get
orphans donated in the 2-3Ghz range just as long as my data is transfered to
the new computer. ;)
looks like such services on your area
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 14:22 +, RW wrote:
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 23:54:38 -0800
Harry Veltman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which version and GUI will work best on the internet with my AT
Pentium II 350MHz x86-based PC? Some web sites require Flash Player
8 or higher,
If flash is
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 15:42 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
If flash is important to you then I'd suggest you run windows firefox
under wine. Native Adobe Flash support is apparently working again in
isn't better to run windows ?
That'd be debatable, wouldn't it?
On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 12:29:03PM -0230, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a solution to this issue for PCBDS 1.3? I am using the WN825G on
an old IBM TP 600.
According to the user guide, this card uses a Broadcom 4306 2050.
AFAIK, these chips are not supported under freebsd. Broadcom
Is there a solution to this issue for PCBDS 1.3? I am using the WN825G
on an old IBM TP 600.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
i tryed to make a VPN between 2 freeBSD 6.2 like this :
10.0.1.0/24 ---GW1: 10.0.0.1 = 10.0.0.2 GW2 --- 10.0.2.0/24
whith GENERIC kernel i can ping from either subnet.
i compiled a custom kernel with options IPSEC and IPSEC_ESP .
the ping dont work ?
Thanks for ur help
ckd ckd wrote:
Hi,
i tryed to make a VPN between 2 freeBSD 6.2 like this :
10.0.1.0/24 ---GW1: 10.0.0.1 = 10.0.0.2 GW2 --- 10.0.2.0/24
whith GENERIC kernel i can ping from either subnet.
i compiled a custom kernel with options IPSEC and IPSEC_ESP .
the ping dont work ?
You
Hi all;
I looked up on the Free archives and what I found was that I should either
install amd64 ( if I use lots of multimedia stuff) or i386 (later compiling
for SMP). I tried ia64 (which I thought means Intel Architecture) but the
image won't even boot.
This machine is going to be
In response to Mario Lobo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi all;
I looked up on the Free archives and what I found was that I should either
install amd64 ( if I use lots of multimedia stuff) or i386 (later compiling
for SMP). I tried ia64 (which I thought means Intel Architecture) but the
image
On Monday 12 February 2007 13:35, Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Mario Lobo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi all;
I looked up on the Free archives and what I found was that I should
either install amd64 ( if I use lots of multimedia stuff) or i386 (later
compiling for SMP). I tried ia64 (which I
Hi all;
I looked up on the Free archives and what I found was that I should either
install amd64 ( if I use lots of multimedia stuff) or i386 (later compiling
for SMP). I tried ia64 (which I thought means Intel Architecture) but the
image won't even boot.
This machine is going to be exclusively
Thanks to everyone who responded.
It looks like pfsense will do the job nicely.
Cheers,
Brett.
-Original Message-
From: Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 5 January 2007 10:52 a.m.
To: Brett Davidson
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Advice on which FreeBSD firewall
Le 05/01/2007 à 10:25:30+1300, Brett Davidson a écrit
Before I start, I'm familiar with IPTables from Linux but am wanting to
use FreeBSD as a firewalling router after seeing it in action on a
heavily-loaded webserver. I like the efficiency of the TCP stack.
Upon reading the handbook I
Atom Powers wrote:
On 1/4/07, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brett Davidson wrote:
Before I start, I'm familiar with IPTables from Linux but am wanting to
use FreeBSD as a firewalling router after seeing it in action on a
heavily-loaded webserver. I like the efficiency of the TCP stack.
It seems is unanimousPF it isremember u have to compile the Kernel
to activate this, i´ve done it for the first time, yesterday and its very
simplealso checkout the ALTQ for QoS, good luck
2007/1/5, Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Atom Powers wrote:
On 1/4/07, Eric [EMAIL
Agus wrote:
It seems is unanimousPF it isremember u have to compile the
Kernel
to activate this, i´ve done it for the first time, yesterday and its very
simplealso checkout the ALTQ for QoS, good luck
just pf does not require touching the kernel, you can load the module,
you just
On 1/5/07, Agus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems is unanimousPF it isremember u have to compile the Kernel
to activate this, i´ve done it for the first time, yesterday and its very
simplealso checkout the ALTQ for QoS, good luck
Does PF and/or ipfilter have ipv6 support? I'm
Michael P. Soulier wrote:
On 1/5/07, Agus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems is unanimousPF it isremember u have to compile the
Kernel
to activate this, i´ve done it for the first time, yesterday and its
very
simplealso checkout the ALTQ for QoS, good luck
Does PF and/or ipfilter
Before I start, I'm familiar with IPTables from Linux but am wanting to
use FreeBSD as a firewalling router after seeing it in action on a
heavily-loaded webserver. I like the efficiency of the TCP stack.
Upon reading the handbook I found that I can have my choice of three
firewalls; pf, iptables
Brett Davidson wrote:
Before I start, I'm familiar with IPTables from Linux but am wanting to
use FreeBSD as a firewalling router after seeing it in action on a
heavily-loaded webserver. I like the efficiency of the TCP stack.
Upon reading the handbook I found that I can have my choice of three
I can't speak to the advantages or disadvantages of each of those
options, but from other lists I get the sense the pf is the best option
out there. If you want something quick to setup, pfSense and m0n0wall
are prebuilt firewall packages based on FreeBSD that will do exactly
what you're looking
, 2007 4:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Advice on which FreeBSD firewall package to choose.
Before I start, I'm familiar with IPTables from Linux but am wanting to
use FreeBSD as a firewalling router after seeing it in action on a
heavily-loaded webserver. I like the efficiency of the TCP
On 1/4/07, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brett Davidson wrote:
Before I start, I'm familiar with IPTables from Linux but am wanting to
use FreeBSD as a firewalling router after seeing it in action on a
heavily-loaded webserver. I like the efficiency of the TCP stack.
Upon reading the
Hi to all, i am new to freebsd and was wondering which RELEASE or version
should i put in a Production Server to offer free shell access an free web
pages hosting.
I downloaded RELEASE5.5 and the latest one 6.1.
I tried to find s STABLE release but couldnt find one
I apreciate any help
Agus wrote:
Hi to all, i am new to freebsd and was wondering which RELEASE or version
should i put in a Production Server to offer free shell access an free web
pages hosting.
I downloaded RELEASE5.5 and the latest one 6.1.
I tried to find s STABLE release but couldnt find one
I apreciate
Hi,
I tried to find s STABLE release but couldnt find one
A stable ? Read
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-stable.html
.
I would opt for 6.
Hth.
Regards,
Robert
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 05:08:07PM -0300, Agus wrote:
Hi to all, i am new to freebsd and was wondering which RELEASE or version
should i put in a Production Server to offer free shell access an free web
pages hosting.
I downloaded RELEASE5.5 and the latest one 6.1.
I tried to find s STABLE
Thanxs, i will start with 6.1 then...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jerry McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 19-oct-2006 17:29
Subject: Re: Which FreeBSD version, release shoult i use?
To: Agus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 05:08
Dear Folks,
I had a Mandrake + WinXP dual boot system but somehow was not satisfied with
Mandrake distro, though it was really cool, still I was not happy. So when I
saw the FreeBSD 6.0 RC1, I thought I will go for it.
Right from the installation, I started anticipating the difficulties which
were
Hello,
I have a dell poweredge 1425sc 1U server that's a few months old. It has dual
zeons
w/HT. I tried at the time to install freebsd 5.3 and 5.4 on it but it would
have a
fatal error with both randomly while running. I posted here and of the very few
responses to fix my problem, someone said
At 06:16 PM 9/27/2005, Jason Lieurance wrote:
Hello,
I have a dell poweredge 1425sc 1U server that's a few months old. It
has dual zeons
w/HT. I tried at the time to install freebsd 5.3 and 5.4 on it but
it would have a
fatal error with both randomly while running. I posted here and of
the
Michael G. Goodell wrote:
Which release of FreeBSD is best for a production environment? I am aware of
the different branches of development: CURRENT, STABLE, RELEASE and I
*think* I understand the meaning of each from what I have read. Perhaps not
since I am writing this question! But, what I
In a message dated 9/30/04 2:04:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Which release of FreeBSD is best for a production environment? I am aware of
the different branches of development: CURRENT, STABLE, RELEASE and I
*think* I understand the meaning of each from what I have
Which release of FreeBSD is best for a production environment? I am aware of
the different branches of development: CURRENT, STABLE, RELEASE and I
*think* I understand the meaning of each from what I have read. Perhaps not
since I am writing this question! But, what I would like to know is when I
Michael G. Goodell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which release of FreeBSD is best for a production environment? I am aware of
the different branches of development: CURRENT, STABLE, RELEASE and I
*think* I understand the meaning of each from what I have read. Perhaps not
since I am writing this
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-07-01 16:36:02 -0500:
Software:
postfix, courier-imap, bind
Consider cyrus-imapd2 or cyrus-imapd22 instead of courier-imap. Very
reliable, very fast, and offers you the ability to create a black
box mail appliance that does not require the use of local user
This belongs in -questions, not -smp.
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, David Newman wrote:
Greetings. For a small office (~10 users), I am planning to build a
mail and DNS server using FreeBSD-SMP; details below. My
requirements are availability and performance, in that order.
Which FreeBSD is better
- Original Message -
From: Scott Kupferschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Chris Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: David Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 4:46 PM
Subject: Re: which FreeBSD?
FreeBSD 4.8-STABLE would be your best bet.
While the machine
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Chris Dillon wrote:
Consider cyrus-imapd2 or cyrus-imapd22 instead of courier-imap. Very
reliable, very fast, and offers you the ability to create a black
box mail appliance that does not require the use of local user
accounts, if you wish to go that route.
But makes it
59 matches
Mail list logo
