Hello
From the SUN ZFS Administration Guide:
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/gaztn?a=view
If ZFS is currently managing the file system but it is currently
unmounted, and the mountpoint property is changed, the file system
remains unmounted.
This does not seem to be the case in FreeBSD
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 2:24 AM, Dan Naumov dan.nau...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello
From the SUN ZFS Administration Guide:
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/gaztn?a=view
If ZFS is currently managing the file system but it is currently
unmounted, and the mountpoint property is changed, the
Hi questioners,
I wanted to test ZFS support for a 10-disk RAID-Z2 pool I have under
FreeBSD 8, as I found Solaris 11 too unstable for my needs.
One disk in the pool is faulted, and is physically not connected to
the machine at the moment. The remaining 9 (plus one slog device) are
attached
stupid things
I do share this point of view, but sadly, an open system like
the Web has been polluted and made unusable (or at least has the
tendency to be this way) for those who cannot access this
propretary product / format.
Don't get me wrong, I've played a bit with Flash on FreeBSD,
found
do stupid things
I really, really dislike the notion that any company, in the selfishly sheer
pursuit of profits, should be able to dictate to anyone what that person should
be able to do, giving that it's within the limits of the law. Not allowing one
to view many sites ISN'T within the moral
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 23:23:31 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
what i personally found is that webpage that can't be viewed at all
without flash most often doesn't have any usable information.
There are web pages that, without Flash, won't even let you know
if
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 00:04:33 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
They don't just dumps out potential readers that don't use the only
right OS and browser.
They too - dumps out all disabled people, most importantly blind.
It's not a problem for a blind to
I don't want to raise an argument here (on multiple levels, no less...),
but what would the compatibility be between FreeBSD (release) and
Solaris?
Why I ask is Adobe have released a version of flash for Solaris, and I'm
wondering if this might work better than the linux_compat types. I tried
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:04:13 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
it's nonsense to FreeBSD developers to do workaround just because adobe
don't want to make FreeBSD binary.
If they don't want to make, then they DONT WANT US to use their product.
They DO HAVE
On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 13:12 +0100, Andreas Xanke wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:04:13 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
it's nonsense to FreeBSD developers to do workaround just because adobe
don't want to make FreeBSD binary.
If they don't want to
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:04:13 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
it's nonsense to FreeBSD developers to do workaround just because adobe
don't want to make FreeBSD binary.
If they don't want to make, then they DONT WANT US to use their product.
They DO HAVE
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
I don't want to raise an argument here (on multiple levels, no less...),
but what would the compatibility be between FreeBSD (release) and
Solaris?
Why I ask is Adobe have released a version of flash for Solaris, and I'm
pursuit of profits, should be able to dictate to anyone what that person should
They DO NOT DICTATE ANYTHING. It's quite free market here, you can use
they product or not. I don't use, mostly because it doesn't run on an OS
that i use.
___
On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 12:45 -0500, Chuck Robey wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
I don't want to raise an argument here (on multiple levels, no less...),
but what would the compatibility be between FreeBSD (release) and
Solaris?
Why I ask
I don't want to raise an argument here (on multiple levels, no less...),
but what would the compatibility be between FreeBSD (release) and
Solaris?
Why I ask is Adobe have released a version of flash for Solaris, and I'm
wondering if this might work better than the linux_compat types. I tried
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:46:17 +1000
Da Rock rock_on_the_...@comcen.com.au wrote:
Why I ask is Adobe have released a version of flash for Solaris, and
I'm wondering if this might work better than the linux_compat types.
I tried running it straight out, but I'm getting errors of a missing
we have a FreeBSD 7.0 NFS client (csup today, built world and kernel).
It mounts a Solaris 10 NFS share.
We have bad performance with 7.0 (3MB/s).
We have tried both UDP and TCP mounts, both sync and async.
This is our mount:
nest.xx.xx:/data/export/hosts/bsd7.xx.xx/ /mnt/nest.xx.xx
Claus Guttesen wrote:
we have a FreeBSD 7.0 NFS client (csup today, built world and kernel).
It mounts a Solaris 10 NFS share.
We have bad performance with 7.0 (3MB/s).
We have tried both UDP and TCP mounts, both sync and async.
This is our mount:
nest.xx.xx:/data/export/hosts/bsd7.xx.xx/ /mnt
Hi list
we have a FreeBSD 7.0 NFS client (csup today, built world and kernel).
It mounts a Solaris 10 NFS share.
We have bad performance with 7.0 (3MB/s).
We have tried both UDP and TCP mounts, both sync and async.
This is our mount:
nest.xx.xx:/data/export/hosts/bsd7.xx.xx/ /mnt/nest.xx.xx nfs
Valerio Daelli wrote:
Hi list
we have a FreeBSD 7.0 NFS client (csup today, built world and kernel).
It mounts a Solaris 10 NFS share.
We have bad performance with 7.0 (3MB/s).
We have tried both UDP and TCP mounts, both sync and async.
This is our mount:
nest.xx.xx:/data/export/hosts/bsd7
Harley Race [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have been playing around with Solaris 10 and was thinking about
testing mail services in a zone. What I would like to know from any
of the MD/Solaris users is whether you used Sun tools to compile MD
or did you use the ancient version of gcc that came
On Tuesday 14 August 2007 15:31:38 Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
Harley Race [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have been playing around with Solaris 10 and was thinking about
testing mail services in a zone. What I would like to know from any
of the MD/Solaris users is whether you used Sun tools
On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 10:21:21PM +, Christian Walther wrote:
On Tuesday 14 August 2007 15:31:38 Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
Harley Race [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have been playing around with Solaris 10 and was thinking about
testing mail services in a zone. What I would like to know
the spark) ; svcadm restart net/nfs on the
solaris box and check.
In fact I can't even cd into /mnt/share as root on FreeBSD.
That's normal. I can't on solaris too. Root has no access and that's a
good thing. If you want access as root you can add 'root' to the group
that has access. But a su user
Hi all,
i have to mount a Solaris HD on my FBSD 6.2 machine in order
to extract some data. It is recognized at boot time as
ad1: 76319MB SAMSUNG SP0842N BH100-35 at ata0-slave UDMA66
I tried
mount -t ext2fs /dev/ad1 /mnt
and got the answer:
mount_ext2fs: /dev/ad1: Invalid argument
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 05:09:51AM +0800, Tun Eler wrote:
Hi all,
i have to mount a Solaris HD on my FBSD 6.2 machine in order
to extract some data. It is recognized at boot time as
ad1: 76319MB SAMSUNG SP0842N BH100-35 at ata0-slave UDMA66
I tried
mount -t ext2fs /dev/ad1 /mnt
On 10 Apr Roland Smith wrote:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 05:09:51AM +0800, Tun Eler wrote:
Hi all,
i have to mount a Solaris HD on my FBSD 6.2 machine in order
to extract some data. It is recognized at boot time as
mount -t ext2fs /dev/ad1 /mnt
and got the answer:
mount_ext2fs: /dev/ad1
Doesn't solaris use UFS filesystems? I think plain old mount shoud do
the trick.
No, mounting without the -t option gives and incorrect super block error
message.
If no other tips come, im afraid i have to reconfigure my kernel then.
Thanks
You might want to enable options GEOM_SUNLABEL
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is a totally unqualified evaluation.
No it's not. It's in response to YOUR comment that A very large majority of
users simply want to use their PCs for email, occasional word processing and
possible game playing. And OpenOffice fits that
--- White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have
tried Open Office. No matter what anyone says,
it
is
just not as full featured as Word 2003. It is
not
even
close.
yeah cause most
White Hat wrote:
--- Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have
tried Open Office. No matter what anyone says, it
is
just not as full featured as Word 2003. It is not
even
close.
True, but also compare the cost. Not even close...
--- White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, the lack of documentation is a shame.
In Windows, yes. In FreeBSD I can't see a lack.
You are kidding right. I can find vastly more
documentation available for a win32 machine than for
FBSD. In fact, the lact of documentation is one of
their x86 OS (think Solaris-10) install with
support, for lets say, what FreeBSD had for 4.2?
I mean, all the drivers are available, wouldn't one think that they
could at least support what FreeBSD supports in terms of number of
devices?
I don't speak officially *for* FreeBSD, but let's be a bit
ANYTHING I always found
it troubling that SUN Microsystems, with all it's resources, could
not, at the least, make their x86 OS (think Solaris-10) install with
support, for lets say, what FreeBSD had for 4.2?
I mean, all the drivers are available, wouldn't one think that they
could at least
, with all it's
resources, could
not, at the least, make their x86 OS (think
Solaris-10) install with
support, for lets say, what FreeBSD had for 4.2?
I mean, all the drivers are available, wouldn't
one think that they
could at least support what FreeBSD supports in
terms of number
. They
want a new printer - no problem. Drop in the CD, it
configures the PC for the printer and the jobs done.
Please, don't tell me about the friend who did that
and it did not work. Nothing always works. Usually
though the problem can be attributed to 'PEBKC'.
Solaris is cool if it will run
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have
tried Open Office. No matter what anyone says, it is
just not as full featured as Word 2003. It is not even
close.
True, but also compare the cost. Not even close...
He/she does
not want to read tons of manuals and spend hours in a
--- Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have
tried Open Office. No matter what anyone says, it
is
just not as full featured as Word 2003. It is not
even
close.
True, but also compare the cost. Not even close...
Immaterial. the
On Sep 6, 2006, at 8:41 AM, White Hat wrote:
Most of these can be far more easily done on a WinXP
machine then anything now available in the *nix
family.
OS X will do it as easily or more easily for the average person than
WinXP. OS X is a unix based OS.
Chad
---
Chad Leigh --
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have
tried Open Office. No matter what anyone says, it
is
just not as full featured as Word 2003. It is not
even
close.
True, but also
--- Jeff Rollin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have
tried Open Office. No matter what anyone says,
it
is
just not as full
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Immaterial. the singularly most important feature is
suitability to task. If it is free and it does not
work, what good is it?
It depends what you are using it for. You made a comment about occaisonal
word processing (pasted below). For such
--- Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Immaterial. the singularly most important feature
is
suitability to task. If it is free and it does not
work, what good is it?
It depends what you are using it for. You made a
comment about
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Jeff Rollin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have
tried Open Office. No matter what
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Immaterial. the singularly most important feature
is
suitability to task. If it is free and it does not
work, what good is it?
It depends what
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, dick hoogendijk wrote:
I have a 3-part disk:
(a) XP for games
(b) FreeBSD-6.1 (my main OS)
(c) FreeBSD-6.1 (a backup)
I want to replace the third partition with solaris 10, mainly for
studying this OS. I burned the DVD. Will it install solaris on this
third partition
P.U.Kruppa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, dick hoogendijk wrote:
I have a 3-part disk:
(a) XP for games
(b) FreeBSD-6.1 (my main OS)
(c) FreeBSD-6.1 (a backup)
I want to replace the third partition with solaris 10, mainly for
studying this OS. I burned the DVD
--- Jeff Rollin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- Jeff Rollin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Jeff Rollin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- Jeff Rollin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06, White Hat
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- Freminlins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06 Sep P.U.Kruppa wrote:
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, dick hoogendijk wrote:
I want to replace the third partition with solaris 10, mainly for
studying this OS.
Hope to get some advice and reading points. I have years of experience
with linux and FreeBSD and like to explore new (OS) challences
--- Giorgos Keramidas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 2006-09-04 15:52, backyard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would recommend the second drive option.
Me too. Not for the same reasons though.
I have attempted installing Solaris 10 on multiple
computers and all
if ever seems to do
really looking at the
hardware compatability list... That being said
ususally the boot loader will not load Solaris for me.
The funny thing is when I had it on a machine with
windows it would boot windows, just not Solaris.
humbly_snipped
I was just thinking about how much I enjoyed the feeling
On 03 Sep Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
I am not sure about installing Solaris into an existing partition.
I remember one of the FBSD's (a RC, but still) destroying my partition
table. That's the reason I ask. I know that I don't have to use the main
option (that's for the whole disk
dick hoogendijk wrote:
On 03 Sep Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
I am not sure about installing Solaris into an existing partition.
I remember one of the FBSD's (a RC, but still) destroying my partition
table. That's the reason I ask. I know that I don't have to use the main
option
At Mon, 4 Sep 2006 it looks like Matthew Seaman composed:
dick hoogendijk wrote:
On 03 Sep Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
I am not sure about installing Solaris into an existing partition.
I remember one of the FBSD's (a RC, but still) destroying my partition
table. That's
On Sep 4, 2006, at 8:57 AM, dick hoogendijk wrote:
On 03 Sep Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
I am not sure about installing Solaris into an existing partition.
I remember one of the FBSD's (a RC, but still) destroying my partition
table. That's the reason I ask. I know that I don't have
At Mon, 4 Sep 2006 it looks like Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC composed:
On Sep 4, 2006, at 8:57 AM, dick hoogendijk wrote:
On 03 Sep Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
I am not sure about installing Solaris into an existing partition.
I remember one of the FBSD's (a RC, but still
--- Bill-S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At Mon, 4 Sep 2006 it looks like Chad Leigh --
Shire.Net LLC composed:
On Sep 4, 2006, at 8:57 AM, dick hoogendijk wrote:
On 03 Sep Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
I am not sure about installing Solaris into an
existing partition
On 2006-09-04 16:57, dick hoogendijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 03 Sep Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
I am not sure about installing Solaris into an existing partition.
I remember one of the FBSD's (a RC, but still) destroying my partition
table. That's the reason I ask. I know
On 2006-09-04 08:41, Bill-S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At Mon, 4 Sep 2006 it looks like Matthew Seaman composed:
Back in the Solaris 8 days, the trick was to use fdisk to create a primary
partition and mark it as type 'Linux Swap' after which Solaris would happily
recognise it as a location
On 2006-09-04 15:52, backyard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would recommend the second drive option.
Me too. Not for the same reasons though.
I have attempted installing Solaris 10 on multiple computers and all
if ever seems to do is corrupt the drive on me. Once I got it to boot
up and go
I have a 3-part disk:
(a) XP for games
(b) FreeBSD-6.1 (my main OS)
(c) FreeBSD-6.1 (a backup)
I want to replace the third partition with solaris 10, mainly for
studying this OS. I burned the DVD. Will it install solaris on this
third partition without trouble? Will I be able to continue to use
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, dick hoogendijk wrote:
I have a 3-part disk:
(a) XP for games
(b) FreeBSD-6.1 (my main OS)
(c) FreeBSD-6.1 (a backup)
I want to replace the third partition with solaris 10, mainly for
studying this OS. I burned the DVD. Will it install solaris on this
third partition
On Sep 3, 2006, at 9:20 PM, P.U.Kruppa wrote:
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, dick hoogendijk wrote:
I have a 3-part disk:
(a) XP for games
(b) FreeBSD-6.1 (my main OS)
(c) FreeBSD-6.1 (a backup)
I want to replace the third partition with solaris 10, mainly for
studying this OS. I burned the DVD
freebsd 6.1 solaris9
questions on the freebsd side:( internal machine running no firewall)
- soalris 9 is the yp server, and two ypslaves are also on solaris 9
built a freebsd 6.1 and i am running into some problems
***
when i initiate
-Original Message-
From: Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 3:56 PM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: Free BSD Questions list; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Solaris patches and Solaris Express
On Nov 21, 2005, at 4:51 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of P.U.Kruppa
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 6:13 AM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: Victor Watkins; FreeBSD-questions@freebsd.org;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; J.D. Bronson
Subject: RE: Solaris patches and Solaris Express
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chad
Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 7:01 AM
To: Free BSD Questions list
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Solaris patches and Solaris Express
On Nov 19, 2005, at 2:02 AM, Ted
On Nov 21, 2005, at 4:51 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
On Nov 19, 2005, at 2:02 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Indeed. But this is not Solaris 10 - thats when all of this
changed.
I never understood why anyone would go to Solaris 10 unless they
had a
64 bit processor and compiled all
-Original Message-
From: J.D. Bronson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 4:00 AM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: Victor Watkins; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; FreeBSD-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: RE: Solaris patches and Solaris Express
At 03:52 AM 11/17/2005, Ted Mittelstaedt
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: J.D. Bronson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 4:00 AM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: Victor Watkins; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; FreeBSD-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: RE: Solaris patches and Solaris
On Nov 19, 2005, at 2:02 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Indeed. But this is not Solaris 10 - thats when all of this changed.
I never understood why anyone would go to Solaris 10 unless they had a
64 bit processor and compiled all their apps under a 64 bit compiler.
Sun
didn't either, which
Hmmm,
We run a lot of Solaris 8 and FreeBSD. I find Solaris 8 pretty
much the same speed as FreeBSD for what we do. However, one thing
is that we do not run X-windows on either our Solaris 8 or FreeBSD
systems, because they are servers and there is no need for it.
I've generally not found
At 03:52 AM 11/17/2005, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Hmmm,
We run a lot of Solaris 8 and FreeBSD. I find Solaris 8 pretty
much the same speed as FreeBSD for what we do. However, one thing
is that we do not run X-windows on either our Solaris 8 or FreeBSD
systems, because they are servers
On Nov 17, 2005, at 5:00 AM, J.D. Bronson wrote:
At 03:52 AM 11/17/2005, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Hmmm,
We run a lot of Solaris 8 and FreeBSD. I find Solaris 8 pretty
much the same speed as FreeBSD for what we do. However, one thing
is that we do not run X-windows on either our Solaris 8
than there being a problem with the
Update Manager connecting, etc.
No longer personally worried about it though..I nuked my Solaris install
and have a nice, shiny new FreeBSD 6.0 kit now, and I gotta say, after
Solaris 5.10 x86, the speed difference alone is breathtaking.
Ironically, I too did
At 18:46 Tue 15 Nov 2005, J.D. Bronson wrote:
I still run 1 solaris machine and thats a sparc running 9.0 ...as
soon as the machine dies or the OS is no longer supported, the
machine will find a nice resting spot in some city dump (or recycler)
Not to start a holy war or anything
At 11:29 AM 11/16/2005, Lee Capps wrote:
At 18:46 Tue 15 Nov 2005, J.D. Bronson wrote:
I still run 1 solaris machine and thats a sparc running 9.0 ...as
soon as the machine dies or the OS is no longer supported, the
machine will find a nice resting spot in some city dump (or recycler
Manager connecting, etc.
No longer personally worried about it though..I nuked my Solaris install
and have a nice, shiny new FreeBSD 6.0 kit now, and I gotta say, after
Solaris 5.10 x86, the speed difference alone is breathtaking.
___
freebsd-questions
Hi!
I would like to print from a Solaris 10 workstation
(192.168.10.3) to my FreeBSD server (192.168.10.1). My idea
was to use Cups and ipp protocol on both
machines since I have already got Cups up and running on my
FreeBSD machine.
Cups on Solaris seems to be up to (I can access
http
work flawlessly on
FreeBSD/i386 6.0-BETA5.
My roadmap is to build world and kernel
on both Linuxes (with other gcc versions)
and then to try and do it all on Solaris 10,
sparc64.
Wish me luck :-)
Cheerz,
Andrew P.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
We've got some mostly idle, but powerful sparc64
servers running Solaris 9/10, as well as a host of
Linux servers (x86 and x86_64). Of course, all the
real work is done on a pack of FreeBSD boxes :-)
Some days ago I started using ccache and distcc,
and I really love these tools. Now I want to get
On Oct 10, 2005, at 2:34 AM, Andrew P. wrote:
We've got some mostly idle, but powerful sparc64
servers running Solaris 9/10, as well as a host of
Linux servers (x86 and x86_64). Of course, all the
real work is done on a pack of FreeBSD boxes :-)
Some days ago I started using ccache and distcc
Andrew P. wrote:
We've got some mostly idle, but powerful sparc64
servers running Solaris 9/10, as well as a host of
Linux servers (x86 and x86_64). Of course, all the
real work is done on a pack of FreeBSD boxes :-)
Some days ago I started using ccache and distcc,
and I really love these tools
In the last episode (Oct 10), Garrett Cooper said:
On Oct 10, 2005, at 2:34 AM, Andrew P. wrote:
We've got some mostly idle, but powerful sparc64 servers running
Solaris 9/10, as well as a host of Linux servers (x86 and x86_64).
Of course, all the real work is done on a pack of FreeBSD
On Oct 10, 2005, at 7:01 AM, Micah wrote:
Andrew P. wrote:
We've got some mostly idle, but powerful sparc64
servers running Solaris 9/10, as well as a host of
Linux servers (x86 and x86_64). Of course, all the
real work is done on a pack of FreeBSD boxes :-)
Some days ago I started using
I know this has been asked before, but I can't find the answer through
searches. I don't remember if this was a FreeBSD or a Solaris related
issue, either, so I'm sorry of I'm getting too far OT.
I'm trying to mount an NFS share from a Solaris 10 (x86) system to a
FreeBSD (5.3-RELEASE-p4) system
On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 10:33:15AM -0400, Louis LeBlanc wrote:
I know this has been asked before, but I can't find the answer through
searches. I don't remember if this was a FreeBSD or a Solaris related
issue, either, so I'm sorry of I'm getting too far OT.
I'm trying to mount an NFS
On 07/13/05 12:34 PM, Kelly D. Grills sat at the `puter and typed:
On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 10:33:15AM -0400, Louis LeBlanc wrote:
I know this has been asked before, but I can't find the answer through
searches. I don't remember if this was a FreeBSD or a Solaris related
issue, either
Louis LeBlanc [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 07/13/05 12:34 PM, Kelly D. Grills sat at the `puter and typed:
See FAQ 12.12 and section 23.3.5 of the handbook.
The -r=1024 parameter solved my problems.
The FAQ. Darnit, I knew I was forgetting something.
That seems to have fixed it so
On 07/13/05 02:34 PM, Lowell Gilbert sat at the `puter and typed:
Louis LeBlanc [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 07/13/05 12:34 PM, Kelly D. Grills sat at the `puter and typed:
See FAQ 12.12 and section 23.3.5 of the handbook.
The -r=1024 parameter solved my problems.
The FAQ.
a way to see the
partition table?
All the ones I tried wouldn't work. FreeBSD does recognize there is a
disk there.
Of course, I can't be sure it's Solaris---previous owner might have
been into Linux/BSD/whatever.
To start with, there's probably a problem with endianness (on the
metadata
, there is the endian issue.
All the ones I tried wouldn't work. FreeBSD does recognize there is a
disk there.
Good the disk works.
Of course, I can't be sure it's Solaris---previous owner might have
been into Linux/BSD/whatever.
If you want to learn a lot about filesystems, you could spend
tried wouldn't work. FreeBSD does recognize there is a
disk there.
Of course, I can't be sure it's Solaris---previous owner might have
been into Linux/BSD/whatever.
--
Wes Groleau[EMAIL PROTECTED]
EDI TechnicianPhone: 260-373-7787
Parkview Health System
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
By going email reading, I just tripped over the add of Sun-Solaris mail:
Dose it means that we may can expect that the Linux and all the BSD
community together with SUN, will grow far more together to build an
even saver and bigger competition
Hello,
I'm having a bit of trouble getting my FreeBSD workstation ( 5.4
PRERELEASE ) binding to our Solaris 8 NIS server. I do not get any
warnings or errors when ypbind starts up, but if I do a 'rpcinfo
localhost', it takes a very long time to come back with anything(stays
in a 'nanslp
Thanks Julien.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mike Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Apr 28, 2005 9:57 AM
Subject: Re: FreeBSD NIS client and Solaris NIS server problem...
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cool, those additional nis_client_flags did the trick, much appreciated :)
Mike C
On 4
Hello,
I'm having a bit of trouble getting my FreeBSD workstation ( 5.4
PRERELEASE ) binding to our Solaris 8 NIS server. I do not get any
warnings or errors when ypbind starts up, but if I do a 'rpcinfo
localhost', it takes a very long time to come back with anything(stays
in a 'nanslp' state
Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Lowell Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] [041015 12:11] wrote:
In the meantime, I came up with the following bit of awk to translate
the table syntax, for my fairly simple case:
match($2,/[^/]*$) {
print substr($2, RSTART+1, RLENGTH)
Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Lowell Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] [041014 08:55] wrote:
Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On the other hand, there is this:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2004-September/036786.html
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
