On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 11:02:25 -0500
Ryan Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks everyone!
>
> I'm going to do a fresh install to a new drive that I am picking up
> in an hour or so from a local retailer.
If this is a server than you almost certainly should go with
I know... And I haven't been googling well lately
but there seem to be a lot of you with a lot of knowledge and you're
willing to share (as am I).
This machine is running a D2C E4600 which (as I understand) is a 64-bit
cpu, but I'm running fBSD 6.3 which is *not* 64-bit? Might
;> willing to share (as am I).
>>>
>>> This machine is running a D2C E4600 which (as I understand) is a 64-bit
>>> cpu, but I'm running fBSD 6.3 which is *not* 64-bit? Might this have
>>> anything to do with the crashes? Is there a stable 64-bit versio
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008, Ryan Coleman wrote:
I'm full of questions, I know... And I haven't been googling well lately but
there seem to be a lot of you with a lot of knowledge and you're willing to
share (as am I).
This machine is running a D2C E4600 which (as I understand) is a 6
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Ryan Coleman wrote:
I'm full of questions, I know... And I haven't been googling well
lately but there seem to be a lot of you with a lot of knowledge and
you're willing to share (as am I).
This machine is running a D2C E4600 which (as I understand) is a
Ryan Coleman wrote:
I'm full of questions, I know... And I haven't been googling well lately
but there seem to be a lot of you with a lot of knowledge and you're
willing to share (as am I).
This machine is running a D2C E4600 which (as I understand) is a 64-bit
cpu, but I
Ryan Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm full of questions, I know... And I haven't been googling well lately
> but there seem to be a lot of you with a lot of knowledge and you're
> willing to share (as am I).
>
> This machine is running a D2C E4600
I'm full of questions, I know... And I haven't been googling well lately
but there seem to be a lot of you with a lot of knowledge and you're
willing to share (as am I).
This machine is running a D2C E4600 which (as I understand) is a 64-bit
cpu, but I'm running fBSD 6.3 w
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 05:13:16PM -0400, Sean Cavanaugh wrote:
>
>
> > The version is called amd64 because AMD published their spec first. (FYI)
> >
>
>
> the thing I have actually wondered is why i386 and amd64 are used as the
> naming convention instead of x86 and x86-64 or x64
Just beca
> The version is called amd64 because AMD published their spec first. (FYI)
>
the thing I have actually wondered is why i386 and amd64 are used as the naming
convention instead of x86 and x86-64 or x64
-Sean
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailin
am wanting to run the system in 64-bit, with using the
> Intel Quad 2.5Ghz Xeon, but I am unsure as to which version I should
> be downloading.
>
> For plesk, I need to use version 6.1 and had read somewhere that I
> would use the AMD 64-bit version, can you confirm if this is co
x it, i searched and found out i shud install lib32 on my 64 bit
machine.
How to install lib32's and from where ??
Thanks,
Navneet
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsu
If i hardcode the sz to 1088 then it works on amd64 systems , how do i deal
with it. I am anticipating lot of coredumps like that, what is a generic
solution for such kinds of problems.
to compile both versions.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailin
ws :
>
> The problem is in the call retval = sysctl(mib, 4, &kp, &sz, NULL, 0);
> where sz is size of kp and where kp is a structure of type kinfo_proc. The
> size of this structure on 32bit system is 768 and on 64 bit system is 1088.
>
> The call works on 32 bit s
y or i have to compile my code on 64 bit machine??
>
> what's a problem to compile on 64-bit machine?
>
>
>
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Am Dienstag, 19. Februar 2008 15:08:12 schrieb Wojciech Puchar:
> > Can anyone tell how do we handle this situation???
> >
> > Is there any way or i have to compile my code on 64 bit machine??
>
> what's a problem to compile on 64-bit machine?
Ugh, there can be lots
Can anyone tell how do we handle this situation???
Is there any way or i have to compile my code on 64 bit machine??
what's a problem to compile on 64-bit machine?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/ma
Binary compiled on 32 bit not running on 64 bit machine.
Actually i am using *sysctl* call and the *kinfo_proc* structure from
user.hin include/sys , size of structure on 32bit is 768 and on 64 bit
is around
1180 and thats why the call is failing and application coredumping.
Can anyone tell how
for both 32 and 64 bit systems. like we have same
binaries
for
32 bit and 64 bit RHEL.
We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
i.erunning binaries compiled on 32 bit FreeBSD
6.2 on 64 bit FreeBSD system they produce *core dump.*
Any known reasons, do we have to compile
I didnt get what do you mean.
Do you mean :
I should install lib32 on freeBSD and then rebuild my applications in order
to make it work on 32 and 64 bit systems .
rite now I have built my app on 32 bit system (which is not having lib32
installed), it works on 32 bit freebsd but fails on 64 bit
Hi,
I'm running FreeBSD 7 on an Athlon64 based machine with a 64 bit
kernel. The machine is supposed to be a server (at home) so there's
basically no Xorg involved.
Now I want to monitor what the system is doing and I decided to
install sysutils/conky from ports. The problem is that con
navneet Upadhyay wrote:
> On 2/18/08, Dominic Fandrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
navneet Upadhyay wrote:
Hi ,
For our product we generally compile the binaries on 32 bit
systems
and use them for both 32 and 64 bit systems. like we have same binaries
for
32 bit and 64 bit
Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Am Montag, den 18.02.2008, 20:42 +0530 schrieb navneet Upadhyay:
> > > it and 64 bit RHEL.
> > >
> > > We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
>
and use them for both 32 and 64 bit systems. like we have same binaries for
32 bit and 64 bit RHEL.
We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
i.erunning binaries compiled on 32 bit FreeBSD
6.2 on 64 bit FreeBSD system they produce *core dump.*
no idea. i use it but
lly compile the binaries on 32 bit
> systems
> > and use them for both 32 and 64 bit systems. like we have same binaries
> for
> > 32 bit and 64 bit RHEL.
> >
> > We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
> > i.erunning binaries comp
I checked in usr/local/ and didnt find the lib32 folder, so i guess they are
nt installed .
Why do i need them ? can u put some light on it ?
On 2/18/08, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Am Montag, den 18.02.2008, 20:42 +0530 schrieb navneet Upadhyay:
> &g
navneet Upadhyay wrote:
Hi ,
For our product we generally compile the binaries on 32 bit systems
and use them for both 32 and 64 bit systems. like we have same binaries for
32 bit and 64 bit RHEL.
We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
i.erunning binaries
Am Montag, den 18.02.2008, 20:42 +0530 schrieb navneet Upadhyay:
> it and 64 bit RHEL.
>
> We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
> i.erunning binaries compiled on 32 bit FreeBSD
> 6.2 on 64 bit FreeBSD system they produce *core dump.*
>
>
>
Hi ,
For our product we generally compile the binaries on 32 bit systems
and use them for both 32 and 64 bit systems. like we have same binaries for
32 bit and 64 bit RHEL.
We are porting the product to FreeBSD and when we tried the same,
i.erunning binaries compiled on 32 bit FreeBSD
6.2
Hi,
my Synaptics touchpad doesn't work on FreeBSD 200710 amd64. I've add
hw.psm.synaptics_support=1
to my /boot/loader.conf and I've compiled x11-drivers/synaptics and
x11-drivers/xf86-input-mouse.
My dmesg says:
psm0: irq 12 on atkbdc0
psm0: [GIANT-LOCKED]
psm0: model Synaptics Touchpad, dev
neric kernel
compiled in sys/i386.
amd64 and i386 are different platforms in the same sense that sparc64
and ppc are different platforms. An AMD 64 is not back-compatible to
pentium pro code when it's in 64-bit mode. Whilst 32-bit binaries can
be run on the amd64 platform, they need spec
86 are different platforms in the same sense that sparc64
and ppc are different platforms. An AMD 64 is not back-compatible to
pentium pro code when it's in 64-bit mode. Whilst 32-bit binaries can
be run on the amd64 platform, they need special handling, you can't
just mix-and-match
1333.39-MHz
>>686-class CPU) into a new box with an AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor
>>3800+ (2387.78-MHz 686-class CPU). I am still building a daily
>>kernel with the old configuration and all is well. Of course the
>>old configuration was/is i386. Now I need to compile for 64
in the same sense that sparc64
and ppc are different platforms. An AMD 64 is not back-compatible to
pentium pro code when it's in 64-bit mode. Whilst 32-bit binaries can
be run on the amd64 platform, they need special handling, you can't
just mix-and-match world and kernel platforms.
Th
4
and ppc are different platforms. An AMD 64 is not back-compatible to
pentium pro code when it's in 64-bit mode. Whilst 32-bit binaries can
be run on the amd64 platform, they need special handling, you can't
just mix-and-match world a
gt;>686-class CPU) into a new box with an AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor
> >>3800+ (2387.78-MHz 686-class CPU). I am still building a daily
> >>kernel with the old configuration and all is well. Of course the
> >>old configuration was/is i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bi
daily
kernel with the old configuration and all is well. Of course the
old configuration was/is i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit
apps.
Are you sure about that? there are few compelling reasons to go to
64-bit, if you already have a working system. As far as performance is
concerned, it
with the old configuration and all is well. Of course the
> old configuration was/is i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit
> apps.
Are you sure about that? there are few compelling reasons to go to
64-bit, if you already have a working system. As far as performance is
concerned, it may go ei
still building a daily kernel with the
old configuration and all is well. Of course the old configuration was/is
i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit apps. I have configured a slightly
modified sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC kernel and was going to build it as a test
only to find out that a simpl
with the
> old configuration and all is well. Of course the old configuration was/is
> i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit apps. I have configured a slightly
> modified sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC kernel and was going to build it as a test
> only to find out that a simple make bui
i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit apps. I
have configured a slightly modified sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC kernel and
was going to build it as a test only to find out that a simple make
buildkernel KERNCONF=AMD doesn't find /sys/amd64/conf/AMD. There is
an old reference in UPDATING
i386. Now I need to compile for 64 bit apps. I
have configured a slightly modified sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC kernel and
was going to build it as a test only to find out that a simple make
buildkernel KERNCONF=AMD doesn't find /sys/amd64/conf/AMD. There is
an old reference in UPDATING
Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> Which build should I use to build a native 64-bit installation on an
> Intel Core 2 Duo (E6600)?
AMD64 kernel, SMP variant. Specific compiler optimizations will not
yield high enough benefits to be generally useful but it probably[*]
won't hurt you.
[*
Which build should I use to build a native 64-bit installation on an
Intel Core 2 Duo (E6600)? Can I use the AMD64 build? Is there anything
I should be careful when rebuilding from source after a cvsup? Can I
just use the AMD64 build and CPUTYPE=nocona in /etc/make.conf ?
Thanks in advance
On 2006/12/12 11:42, Y Sidhu seems to have typed:
>> a. SuperMicro X7DBR-8+ / X7DBR-I+
Seems that others have had problems with SuperMicro boards:
http://www.freebsd.org/platforms/amd64/motherboards.html
*** QUOTE ***
Boots stock SMP kernel. UP kernel must be booted in "safe mode"
*** END QUOTE
An update for some who may care. I tried loading Live Linux distros: Puppy,
DSL and STD. They load fine but don't see a network interface. Also
installed Fedora 5 Linux Distro and same - no ethernet interface seen. It
has been a while but I recall that Windows XP pro will not boot.
Anybody have a
I am a newbie and have gone though past posts and have been looking at the
last couple of weeks of posts go by. I have not seen anything similar to my
problem. I cannot load an OS except under ACPI-Disabled. I can boot into
safe mode, but cannot configure a working network interface. Therefore, I
You Wrote:
> I wonder if I could benefit from these features when running AMD64
> version. On i386 install, I just enabled SMP and the OS happilly
> reported 2 logical cpus, however, I'm not sure how I will build a
> particular application to benefit from this hyperthreading thing.
Not all applica
Hi,
I just purchased a new Intel Pentium 4(3.06Ghz), 533 Mhz FSB, supporting
EM64T (as written in the box).
It has 1 MB cache size, package type = LGA 775, processor number = 524
Features: (as shown in the dropdown combo box when cpu speed =3.06,
processor number = 524)
http://processorfinder.in
ver, and
are trying to get plesk installed. But plesk isn't supported for
FreeBSD 6.1 64-bit version yet, so it has been hard work to try
trick it. Now I want to trick the uname command to show the
version needed for plesk installation. Any one having an easy and
pretty safe way to
r, and are
trying to get plesk installed. But plesk isn't supported for FreeBSD
6.1 64-bit version yet, so it has been hard work to try trick it. Now
I want to trick the uname command to show the version needed for
plesk installation. Any one having an easy and pretty safe way to do
this? T
Hello
I've got FreeBSD 6.1 installed on a Sun Fire X2100 server, and are
trying to get plesk installed. But plesk isn't supported for FreeBSD
6.1 64-bit version yet, so it has been hard work to try trick it. Now
I want to trick the uname command to show the version needed f
(2.20~2.40GHz, 1MB L2 cache, socket 939)
Core Logic 。VIA K8T890CE + VT8237R
Display 。17.1" WXGA (1440x900) TFT / 17.1"
WSXGA+ (1680x1050) / 17.1" WUXGA (1920x1200) TFT
Memory 。Two 64-bit wide DDR data channels
。Two 200-pin SODIMM sockets, supporting DDR 400
。Expandable Mem
default FreeBSD/i386 - it will be at least 30%.
just because it's not just 64-bit addresses, but twice the registers
(r8-r15) allowing C compiler to generate more efficient code.
For now AMD64 is the fastest and cheapest architecture - at least
with AMD processors, not intel clones. (YES now
/i386 - it will be at least 30%.
just because it's not just 64-bit addresses, but twice the
registers (r8-r15) allowing C compiler to generate more efficient
code.
For now AMD64 is the fastest and cheapest architecture - at least
with AMD processors, not intel clones. (YES now intel
just 64-bit addresses, but twice
the registers (r8-r15) allowing C compiler to generate more efficient
code.
For now AMD64 is the fastest and cheapest architecture - at least with AMD
processors, not intel clones. (YES now intel makes clones of AMD
proce
Generally speaking, mail and file server are not RAM intensive. A 32
proc can directly address 4GB RAM (2**32). FreeBSD allows you to
address more than 4GB on a 32 bit proc but limited to 4GB max per
process. The actual per process limit will be a bit less, I think.
A 64 bit proc can
I hope that I'm not starting some sort of holy war with this question,
but here I'll go.
I'm planning to set-up some e-mail / file servers running FreeBSD 6.1 in
the near future and I'm wondering if it will be worth the cost to use 64
but CPU's for this.
Also I would like to know which bran
On 6/23/06, Michael P. Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 21/06/06 Nikolas Britton said:
> The consensus seems to be that FreeBSD/amd64 is a tad slower then
> FreeBSD/i386 because it has to deal with 32 extra bits. The primary
> reason to use FreeBSD/amd64 seems to be if you need greater then
On 21/06/06 Nikolas Britton said:
> The consensus seems to be that FreeBSD/amd64 is a tad slower then
> FreeBSD/i386 because it has to deal with 32 extra bits. The primary
> reason to use FreeBSD/amd64 seems to be if you need greater then 4GB
> of RAM.
>
> This should give you the speed boost you
> > screen?
> > /usr/port/sysutils/screen
>
> My users need up to 20 instances of a graphical analysis package
> which has a text-based control window that spawns two graphical
> windows. They run a window manager with 24 virtual desktops,
> each running an instance of this program. As much as
On Thursday 22 June 2006 17:06, pete wright wrote:
>
> Did you try to build/install a 32bit version of VNC? Also, if you are
> running a Unix like OS why use VNC? You can achive %90 of the same
> features (with less of a memory/cpu impact) by running X apps
> remotely.
>
> -pete
How do you do c
up script. Some applications (just about anything using gtk) crash the
> VNC server, and some (KDE) work all right. YMMV.
>
> I have tried to make NXWindows work on amd64 but there is just too much
> patching that needs to be done for my meager skills.
Thanks for the info. I had figure
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 04:15:47PM -0700, pete wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hmm, so there is no way to run the app's which are not 64bit clean in
> 32bit mode in your environment?
I did test one of them. It works, but I don't have time to
mess with all of them, and finding the 32-bit libra
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 03:06:46PM -0700, pete wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Did you try to build/install a 32bit version of VNC?
Thanks for the suggestion.
I thought about doing that, but there is still other essential
software that is not 64-bit clean and our entire group n
oftware that is not 64-bit clean and our entire group needs this
machine back up ASAP since currently we are sitting on our hands
doing nothing till I get it back up. If I had a spare machine
I could potentially spend some time getting this sorted. But
we don't have a spare machine, we don
g gtk) crash the
> VNC server, and some (KDE) work all right. YMMV.
>
> I have tried to make NXWindows work on amd64 but there is just too much
> patching that needs to be done for my meager skills.
Thanks for the info. I had figured something like this. I installed
the 64-bit syste
I have the same ,problem,But I have never run on other version,I use
RELENG_6_1, AMD64
On 6/22/06, Greg Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
G'day everyone,
I recently had to replace a disk and took the opportunity to
upgrade from 5-stable to 6-stable. I also changed from the
32-bit to
G'day everyone,
I recently had to replace a disk and took the opportunity to
upgrade from 5-stable to 6-stable. I also changed from the
32-bit to the 64-bit version. I have a dual Opteron server.
VNC installed from ports (4.2.1) doesn't work on the 64-bit machine.
The same version
tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM64T
>
> Why do you need to run in 64-bit mode?
I'm asking that myself. I'd like to do comparisons with and without 64-bit
support.
The consensus seems to be that FreeBSD/amd64 is a tad slower then
FreeBSD/i386 because it has to deal with 32 extra bi
tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM64T
>
> Why do you need to run in 64-bit mode?
I'm asking that myself. I'd like to do comparisons with and without 64-bit
support.
The consensus seems to be that FreeBSD/amd64 is a tad slower then
FreeBSD/i386 because it has to deal with 32 extra bi
On 21/06/06 Nikolas Britton said:
> IA64 = Itanium, Itanium2 = FreeBSD/ia64
> EM64T = Intel CPUs with AMD64 (P4, Xeon, etc.) = FreeBSD/amd64
> AMD64 = Opteron, Athlon 64, Turion 64, Sempron 64 = FreeBSD/amd64
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM64T
>
> Why do you need to run
On 6/20/06, Michael P. Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 20/06/06 Andy Reitz said:
> I believe that ia64 refers to the Itanium port of FreeBSD, and I'm not
> sure of the i386 version will install on Itanium. Are you referring to the
> AMD64/EMT-64 port of FreeBSD?
It&#x
Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> On 20/06/06 Andy Reitz said:
>
>> I believe that ia64 refers to the Itanium port of FreeBSD, and I'm not
>> sure of the i386 version will install on Itanium. Are you referring to the
>> AMD64/EMT-64 port of FreeBSD?
>
> It's a 6
On 20/06/06 Andy Reitz said:
> I believe that ia64 refers to the Itanium port of FreeBSD, and I'm not
> sure of the i386 version will install on Itanium. Are you referring to the
> AMD64/EMT-64 port of FreeBSD?
It's a 64-bit P4. My i386 5.4 install works fine.
Mike
--
--- "Michael P. Soulier"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I recently got an ia64 box at work, and I threw
> my i386 freebsd 5.4 on it.
> Now, is there a way to rebuild world with
> 64-bit support from there?
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
Everything I&#
On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I recently got an ia64 box at work, and I threw my i386 freebsd 5.4 on it.
> Now, is there a way to rebuild world with 64-bit support from there?
Hi Mike,
I believe that ia64 refers to the Itanium port of FreeBSD, and I&#
Hello,
I recently got an ia64 box at work, and I threw my i386 freebsd 5.4 on it.
Now, is there a way to rebuild world with 64-bit support from there?
Thanks,
Mike
--
Michael P. Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It
takes
the servers directly, is query the switch
ports they are plugged into. I use Cisco and HP switches and they have
supported 64-bit SNMP counters for years. For servers attached to
unmanaged switches, I poll their 32-bit counters every minute and
accept that I can't graph very high traffic r
> > I am running freebsd 4.11 release and want to have
> > net-snmp to support 64 bit counter
>
> FreeBSD's internal network counters are 32-bit, so
> it won't help you.
>
> --
> Dan Nelson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
__
In the last episode (May 03), adrian kok said:
> I am running freebsd 4.11 release and want to have
> net-snmp to support 64 bit counter
FreeBSD's internal network counters are 32-bit, so it won't help you.
--
Dan Nelson
Hi All
I am running freebsd 4.11 release and want to have
net-snmp to support 64 bit counter
I deinstall the net-snmp but don't know how to
re-complie the port to support
--enable-mfd-rewrites
I changed the Makefile and recomplied it and it
doesn't work
snmpwalk -v 2c -c x
Gentlemen,
I have spent several days reading all the documentation I can find but no
reference to my problem.
linux compatibility:
# kldload linux#
OR
linux_enable="YES"
both work on my FreeBSD 5.4 32 bit athlon.
On my opteron and athlon64 machines with FreeBSD 5.4 or 6.0 (b
I'm buying a new computer, and am thinking of the new dual core AMD X2.
I'm not sure I want to run 64 bit kernel yet, because of driver support and
things like flash, and video, etc..
Will this processor still be as fast as a 32 bit if I use i386 kernel?
Do I have to use a SMP ke
ds to each core?
Not sure if I'm the right person to answer this in great technical
detail, but I think the answer is 'yes' to both questions.
> 2. While the OS will use the 64 bit mode, will the applications still
> run in the compatibly mode?
Not necessarily. By default
Le 18/01/2006 à 17:40:00-0500, Anthony Dematteo a écrit
> I have a couple questions about the AMD64 Project.
>
> 1. They page mentions that there is multiprocessor support. Does
> this include the dual core processors? Will the OS dispatch processes
> and threads to each core?
I only can answ
I have a couple questions about the AMD64 Project.
1. They page mentions that there is multiprocessor support. Does
this include the dual core processors? Will the OS dispatch processes
and threads to each core?
2. While the OS will use the 64 bit mode, will the applications still
run in the
al Message - From: "Amandeep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I am instalaling FreeBSD 5.3 AMD 64 bit with 6- 200GB drives. Using
Higpoint 1820A controller and doing RAID 10. I am using drivers for
the card from Highpoint Web.
The problem is when I make the partitions and the machine tries to
Hello,
I think it's a question for the highpoint support. It's their product
and their driver.
Here are some instant hints:
- read the PDF carefully and follow the instructions strictly
- use the BIOS in the tarball; nothing else!!
Regards Björn
andeep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I am instalaling FreeBSD 5.3 AMD 64 bit with 6- 200GB drives. Using
Higpoint 1820A controller and doing RAID 10. I am using drivers for
the card from Highpoint Web.
The problem is when I make the partitions and the machine tries to
format the partitions
Hi guys,
Anyone???
Amandeep wrote:
Hi all,
I am instalaling FreeBSD 5.3 AMD 64 bit with 6- 200GB drives. Using
Higpoint 1820A controller and doing RAID 10. I am using drivers for
the card from Highpoint Web.
The problem is when I make the partitions and the machine tries to
format the
Hi all,
I am instalaling FreeBSD 5.3 AMD 64 bit with 6- 200GB drives. Using
Higpoint 1820A controller and doing RAID 10. I am using drivers for the
card from Highpoint Web.
The problem is when I make the partitions and the machine tries to
format the partitions it says:
unable to find
On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 12:44:12PM +, Michael Hopkins, Hopkins Research
wrote:
> 3) Is the 64 bit AMD port of FreeBSD stable?
Yes, remarkably so.
Kris
pgpZj8CScgJmj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
e of those ones here...
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8796_11869%
5E11880,00.html
2) Is there any performance penalty to (1) if I can.
3) Is the 64 bit AMD port of FreeBSD stable?
Many thanks for your tim
Will FreeBSD 5.3 Run on this Hardware Configuration
CPU
Network Cards
I would also like to Hardware Raid 5 with the Intel Raid Card
Would this be seamless to FreeBSD?
5U Intel SC5300 Rack Mount Black
Dual Intel CPU Xeon 3GHz CPU, 64-bit, 1mb cache
Intel Gigabit Ethernet x 2
2 GB ECC memory
4 144GB
eodyna wrote:
hi everyone.
i just want to know if anyone has had any major issues
running freebsd on 64bit architecture.
i am wanting to buy a asus a8v deluxe - 939 via k8t800
pro motherboard with a amd athlon64 939 3500+ chip.
If anyone has any experience, id love to listen to
your do's and don'ts
hi everyone.
i just want to know if anyone has had any major issues
running freebsd on 64bit architecture.
i am wanting to buy a asus a8v deluxe - 939 via k8t800
pro motherboard with a amd athlon64 939 3500+ chip.
If anyone has any experience, id love to listen to
your do's and don'ts.
thanks!!
eeBSD 4.10. I've
just
> > looked into a current manpage from www.freebsd.org, and it says
> > something about 4.x compatibility.
> >
> > What is the best way to go if I need to write scripts now, but I'm
> > planning to switch to 5.x later? Can I upgrade expr
m www.freebsd.org, and it says
> something about 4.x compatibility.
>
> What is the best way to go if I need to write scripts now, but I'm
> planning to switch to 5.x later? Can I upgrade expr(1) now? If not,
> what should I do?
In 4.x, expr does 64-bit math by default. Apparen
's
> expr command has a -e flag that will let it do 64-bit math:
>
> $ echo $(( 65536*65536 ))
> 0
> $ echo $(expr 65536 "*" 65536)
> 0
> $ echo $(expr -e 65536 "*" 65536)
> 4294967296
>
> bash, ksh93 (but not pdksh), and zsh's shell arithme
201 - 300 of 319 matches
Mail list logo
