Re: Busniess Proposal?
In a message dated 1/11/05 9:50:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dear Friend, Let me start by introducing myself. I am Mr. Wang Qin Credit officer of the Hang Seng Bank Ltd. I have a Concealed business suggestion for you. Before the U.S and Iraqi war, our client General. Ibrahim Moussa who was an Iraqi Business man made a numbered fixed deposit for 18 Calendar months, with a value of Twenty millions Five Hundred Thousand United State Dollars only in my Branch. Upon maturity several notice was sent to him, During the war, And again after the War another notification was sent and still no Response came from him. - Please send the funds to The FreeBSD Foundation 7321 Brockway Dr. Boulder, CO 80303 USA Maybe they can buy some motherboards or something... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Freebsd 5.3 Performance
Mr Watson, As you are listed as the leader of the FreeBSD foundation, and you seem to be the only one willing to admit that FreeBSD 5.3 is not yet up to the performance of 4.x, doesn't in concern you that: 1) Freebsd 4.x is not being supported as a production O/S, and the support is ending with 4.11 before 5.x is ready performance-wise? 2) FreeBSD 4.x doesn't seem to work well with the 7520/5 chipsets, which are required to run the latest Intel XEON CPUs (Dell's most powerful servers, for example, are based on the 7520). A long-standing PR has been largely ignored 3) None of your developers, according to Ted M, have ever heard of Intel's latest and most powerful chipsets. 4) no one in your organization seems to care about 1, 2 or 3 FreeBSD has fallen into a performance hole of sorts, in that the fastest version doesnt run on the fastest Motherboards. Its easily correctable, by simply dedicating resources for a day or 2 to find out whats wrong with the 7520 support. I'd like to hear why you don't think its worthwhile, as a primary goal, to make certain that the fastest version of the product works well on the fastest available motherboards. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Freebsd 5.3 Performance
I find in amazing that a discussion of how FreeBSD 5.3 sucks compared to 4.x can segue into an discussion of FreeBSD vs Windows. I guess thats the politics of computing. And also a commentary on the mentality of the kind of person that uses FreeBSD. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Freebsd 5.3 Performance
Your point doesn't address the lack of support for major chipsets, so that users can utilitize the latest fast processors available. The point is that those using 4.x because of its performance advantages, cannot use it with the latest processors because the MBs don't work in 4.x. THAT is the problem. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
If you nor any of the FreeBSD developers know about the 75xx series of chipsets, then I guess that explains why the score is Linux 87, FreeBSD 2. and getting worse by the day. Nicely done. What are you developing on, gaming machines? Why have you trashed the OS to strengthen SMP computing when you don't even know what chipsets are required to run the latest SMP processors? What's really scary is that you'd rather come up with 35 reasons not to do something than to spend 10 minutes trying to find out what you don't know. I posted exactly why 5.x is slower than 4.x, and its not because its bigger, you blubbering moron. Thats the kind of answer I'd expect from my secretary. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How long will 4.x be supported?
In a message dated 1/7/05 4:50:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Given the serious stability issues that *some* users are having with 5.3, many are sticking with 4.x for production servers. Will FreeBSD keep the 4.x line alive for a little while longer? Perhaps going into 4.12, 4.13, etc? I ask this only because I don't see a lot of communication to the list about these issues being addressed. Just note that they say its supported, but if you want to use the latest Intel CPUs (800Mhz FSB Xeon64), they don't work in 4.x. Sadly noone in the FreeBSD universe is even familiar (it seems) with new server MBs. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/6/05 1:44:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One system cost me 3 months salary in Russia. Is this how you treat your users? Why can't your developer use the machine they used to make 5.3 work? YOU are not PAYING the FreeBSD developers to develop for your particular SuperMicro motherboard. Teddy, Its the most prevalent and popolar chipset on the market, Ted. At least pretend to be somewhat competent at your trade. End uses shouldnt have to fund organization touting free OSs on mainstream chipsets. Its ridiculous that you don't support it. TM ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/5/05 7:39:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Your point might have some teeth if the newer version were better, but the entire problem is that 5.x is much worse than 4.x, so there lies the issue. 4.10 is NOT supposed to be an old version. Its the production version. Because its readily admitted that 5.x is not yet ready for prime time by those in the know. And its not properly suppored. Thats strange, http://www.freebsd.org says 5.3 is the Production release and 4.10 is the (legacy) production release I guess they just dont teach you words like legacy in troll school. And why is that, when Robert Watson has outlined, on this list, why 5.x isnt ready yet? I find it amazing that not one person in this stupid customer base cares about that fact? Are you all a bunch of wireless college kids or something? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/5/05 7:25:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 1/5/05 7:16:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why are you here? I wish I could be as arrogant and condescending as you, but clearly you were born with an advantage in that are He has a Holy Mission. Yes, a mission to get the FreeBSD team to support 4.10 until they can get 5.x working properly. Whats not reasonable about that? That you think being an unbearable asshole is an appropriate way to go about it. Kris Well apparaently if someone asks nicely you ask them to donate their hardware. Why don't you answer the question, as to why the newest intel chipsets are not supported by 4.x, instead of bashing me? You dont have any answers. You guys couldnt even sweep up after the original FreeBSD team. What a travesty. And apparently there aren't any technically capable people using FreeBSD anymore, because they all seem very happy with an O/S that is substantially slower than it was before. What a waste. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freebsd 5.3 Performance
In a message dated 1/6/05 4:51:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 4.10 *is* supported, and 5.3 works as advertised - what the hell is your *problem* exactly??? Its been well documented that 5.3 does NOT work as advertised, and the newest intel chipsets (not that new) don't work in 4.10, redering is useless with the newer intel processors. To quote Robert watson of the Freebsd core team who posted to this list on Nov 11, 2004: FreeBSD 5.3 sees an observably higher per-packet processing costs than the 4.x branch due to in-progress changes to the synchronization and queueing models. Specifically, the SMPng work has changed the interrupt and synchronization models throughout the kernel in order to increase concurrency and preemptibility (i.e., lower latency in interrupt-based processing). However, this has increaseed the overall overhead of synchronization on the stack. The network stack forwarding path is particularly sensitive to this, so while other parts of the system see immediate concurrency benefits (i.e., socket-centric web servers that now see less contention on SMP, and more preemption on UP), this path still runs slower for many workloads. We're actively working to remedy this, and you will see changes merged to the 6.x and 5.x branches over the next couple of months that will cut into the numbers you see above by quite a bit. Off the top of my head, I would have expected to see more around a 15% overhead on UP for the workload you're seeing, but as you point out, results can and do vary. 5.3 is not ready for production. 4.10 should be fully supported until it is. TM ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/6/05 2:10:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you really have no contacts at SM or Dell? What kind of a development org has no contacts with major vendors? It's not a question of not having contacts. It's a question of actually defining the problem in a way that a developer can get a fix on it. Currently, this is done with the PR mechanism on FreeBSD.org. Doing a search of this shows only PR i386/72579, which claims FreeBSD 4.X doesen't work at all on this chipset, which is contrary to what the OP was saying. Thats NOT contrary to what anyone was saying (Im not sure who OP is). You're just too busy writing people off as trolls to read whats written. He said it didnt work at all with the 7520 MB, and he said his OLD 533Mhz MB was faster in 4.9 than the new MB was in 5.3 so it made no sense to upgrade. So, apparently, doing a PR doesnt work, since the PR you cited has been largely ignored for 3 months. So whats else do you recommend, Ted? PS: the 7520/7530 is required for use of Intel's newest CPUs, so its not some random chipset. It should be way higher in the list of priorities than the peripheral fixes noted for 4.11. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Freebsd 5.3 Performance
The moment you start paying for development and support I'll agree with you. Getting an incompetent like you to agree with me is so far from important that I can't help but smile about the thought of it ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/5/05 12:23:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Everyone tell me to use LINUX. Now I know why. You support bad slow version and not good one. Very stupid people. FreeBSD is more organized and managed more professionally compared to many of the Linux distrubtion organizations. That is why anyone will tell you to use anything except $THAT. The FreeBSD development seems slow compared to Linux development for numberous of reasons. I cannot and will not name them except for one. We go for quality...not bleeding edge (I did that first!..but it's broken after few days). Everyone in the world is stupid...no perfect smart human exists. :) Chris Do you really believe that Chris? Its not about being slow. Its about everyone being focused on the new version while ignoring needs for the only version suitable for production. It would be fine that 5.x is taking way longer than expected, and that the performance is well below what was promised, if 4.x was being supported as the mainstream version. The truth is that if someone in the linux camp needed a MB they'd call supermicro or Dell and get one the next day. Apparently FreeBSD doesn't have that kind of pull. If the FreeBSD foundation doesnt have $250. to support a mainstream chipset used by the world's 2 largest manufacturers, or you don't have a corporate sponsor with a single Dell machine to loan for a few days, then it says something about your organization, or lack thereof. Linux also doesnt do a major release until its arguably better than the previous version. Another lesson that the FreeBSD camp could well learn from. You do your tweaking in the confines of your labs, not at the expense of your customer base.. Stupid is a choice. Its easily correctable if you ever get out of your state of denial and stop acting like a bunch of overaged college kids.Come to tems with the fact the 5.x is a year away and don't leave the base thats gotten you to where you are in the lurch. TM ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/5/05 1:20:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Linux also doesnt do a major release until its arguably better than the previous version. Another lesson that the FreeBSD camp could well learn from. You do your tweaking in the confines of your labs, not at the expense of your customer base.. I'm sorry ... I missed something. What exactly was the major arguably better difference between RedHat 8 and RedHat 9? I got the distinct impression RedHat was playing the version number game with SuSE and Mandrake. Or how about RedHat 7.2 to 7.3? Yes, you've missed the fact that kernels and distributions are independent of one-another in linux. Redhat is just a distribution and has little to do with what particular kernel version you are using. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/5/05 2:39:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One system cost me 3 months salary in Russia. Is this how you treat your users? Why can't your developer use the machine they used to make 5.3 work? Everyone tell me to use LINUX. Now I know why. You support bad slow version and not good one. Very stupid people. Thank you for trolling on an otherwise incredibly useful, civil, polite and helpful list. Now be gone. Back to your Linuxian ways Asking a guy from a poor country to donate his hardware to a US organization at least partially funded by Yahoo is helpful? What planet are you from? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sun revokes FreeBSD license for Java
In a message dated 1/5/05 1:53:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This is Paul Krill of Infoworld magazine. I would like to speak with someone at FreeBSD regarding issues with Sun. I am at 415-978-3228 or email me with a number where I can call you. Thanks. --- So some application that runs like crap won't run on FreeBSD anymore. Big deal. Someone should start designing the new java-free logo. Seems like a big selling point to me. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/5/05 3:00:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Asking a guy from a poor country to donate his hardware to a US organization at least partially funded by Yahoo is helpful? What planet are you from? The planet where 99% of the posts on this list are helpful, and the one from this guy (who calls the members of this list, and I quote, very stupid people) isn't. I don't think he was calling the members of this list stupid. Only that not supporting major chipsets and whining about not having the funding nor the contacts to get a $250 Mobo as an excuse was Stupid. This is not a new chipset. Its been out for months and months. TM ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/5/05 4:03:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Besides ... with a name like hardcodeharry, I would expect a little more intelligence; a little more willingness to dig into things. A slight tendency to ask the question: how can I hack this code to work, and how would I contribute those modifications to the BSD team? You obviously speak from your armpit, because to do the kind of work to support the O/S at the chipset level is beyond the reasonable expectations of even the most talented of programmers. The learning curve to be able to understand the basic code is exceptionally steep. Thats why there are maintainers, becuase what takes him an hour would take someone else weeks. 2. Don't expect every damn piece of hardware out there to work out of the box with an older version of the kernel for the given *nix. This is NOT WINDOWS (thank god) and just because you have a particular piece of hardware doesn't mean it's going to work. It is your responsibility to know this and to work with it. 3. Ask questions politely in the appropriate forums, and be civil. Failing to do so is probably not going to get your question answered. I for one was drafting a post for this list thanking *everyone* on it for being the kind of terrific help they are when Boris' post appeared. The kind of discourse I see on this list (and on other BSD oriented lists) is a huge and welcome contrast to the childish banter I see on most of the Linux (and MacOS and Windows) discussion lists out there. It is like the kind of professional enthusiasm I remember on the BeOS lists. -- Your point might have some teeth if the newer version were better, but the entire problem is that 5.x is much worse than 4.x, so there lies the issue. 4.10 is NOT supposed to be an old version. Its the production version. Because its readily admitted that 5.x is not yet ready for prime time by those in the know. And its not properly suppored. The tranquility of this list is apparently because the people on this list are too technically incompetent to realize how badly botched 5.x is. thank you master, thank you for helping me get my mouse working, let me kiss your boots The truth is that you are in awe of a team that has done a terrible job of transitioning to a new version, who can't get the new version to perform at close to the levels of the previous version after several years, and who have time and time again failed to meet their promised performance targets. They force their customer base to use the slothy thing, because modern motherboards and comm cards dont work in 4.x. And you stand and cheer them. Like a bunch of blind men cheering the one-eyed fool. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/5/05 3:59:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Rather, it was the people who *developed* the *free* and very powerful operating system (that he is attempting to use) he called stupid. I'm still waiting to see him post an apology. I, for one, am humbled by the BSD teams. They do work I don't believe I could ever do, regardless of my 15 years of work in software. Well you are worshiping the wrong mountain, my friend, because the people who developed the free, powerful OS you speak of are mostly long gone. The current team is reponsible for a new version that is 1/4 slower than its predecessor. Doesn't seem so awesome to me. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/5/05 6:29:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Whine, whine, whine, bitch, bitch, bitch. You aren't technically capable of grasping a single point in this discussion, Tom, so why are you even trying? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/4/05 11:50:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: None of the new Supermicro hardware I've tried works with Freebsd 4.10 properly. I've seen that this has been reported by others. They are all based on the 7520 and 7530 Intel chips. 5.3 works ok, but a 3.4/800 processor on 5.3 is slower than a 3.06/533 processor on our old 7502 chipset based system with 4.9. What can be done? Donate one of the systems to a FreeBSD kernel developer. Ted Do you really have no contacts at SM or Dell? What kind of a development org has no contacts with major vendors? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD
In a message dated 1/5/05 7:16:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why are you here? I wish I could be as arrogant and condescending as you, but clearly you were born with an advantage in that are He has a Holy Mission. Yes, a mission to get the FreeBSD team to support 4.10 until they can get 5.x working properly. Whats not reasonable about that? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
82546GB support for em driver
Neither the 5.3 nor 4.10 hardware notes mention te 82546GB chip, however there seems to be snippets of code that reference it. Is it supported? If so, what version of FreeBSD first supported it? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
