Dear all:
I find the sendmail-sasl port will not compile with the option
SASLv2 and I can not get SMTP Auth. The port will install TLS and
Cyrus-SASL but as I use the command --sendmail -d0.1 -bv root | grep SASL--
I can not find it compiled with SASL.
Any solution to fix it. THX.
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 01:51:19PM +1200, Mark Kirkwood wrote..
Jonathan Chen wrote:
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 09:03:06PM -0400, Dave wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to compile 6.0-stable on a release box, prior to upgrade.
I've tried several times and all end with an internal compiler error:
Dmitriy Kirhlarov wrote:
Hi!
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 04:35:21PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote:
6.1-STABLE after 6.1-RELEASE is releases. So I think you may want
If you use snapshots with your quotas, update to 6.1-STABLE. If you
Sorry, guys. You are mean RELENG_6_1 or RELENG_6?
WBR
Did you change your make.conf?
Dear all:
I find the sendmail-sasl port will not compile with the option
SASLv2 and I can not get SMTP Auth. The port will install TLS and
Cyrus-SASL but as I use the command --sendmail -d0.1 -bv root | grep
SASL--
I can not find it compiled with SASL.
On Tue, 2006-May-23 19:04:18 +, Hunter Fuller wrote:
Am I the only one who sees the oxymoronity in 6.1-stable crash?
Hopefully.
As is regularly pointed out, 'stable' refers primarily to the ABI.
FreeBSD 6.1-stable is still under active development, though only
code that has previously been
Dave wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to compile 6.0-stable on a release box, prior to upgrade.
I've tried several times and all end with an internal compiler error:
segmentation fault: 11. And then i'm told to submit a bug report. My
problem is when this occurs it's not always at the same spot or
* Paul.LKW [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Dear all:
I find the sendmail-sasl port will not compile with the option
SASLv2 and I can not get SMTP Auth. The port will install TLS and
Cyrus-SASL but as I use the command --sendmail -d0.1 -bv root | grep SASL--
I can not find it compiled with SASL.
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 16:35 -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote:
If you use snapshots with your quotas, update to 6.1-STABLE. If you
don't use snapshots, 6.1-R should be fine. This was discussed in
excruciating depth a few weeks back, so please read the archives for
more.
Probably I've to stress
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 16:36 -0500, Kirk Strauser wrote:
On Tuesday 23 May 2006 16:19, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
I meant 'kern.ipc.shmall', which used to be 'kern.ipc.shmmaxpgs'. :-(
That did it! Bumping kern.ipc.shmall to 65536 got me back up and running
with enough shared_memory to get my
There are no problems with Postfix.
http://wiki.botka.homeunix.org/bin/view/Main/PostfixSaslTls
Cheers,
-vlado
D000
On Wed, 24 May 2006, Paul.LKW wrote:
Dear all:
I find the sendmail-sasl port will not compile with the option
SASLv2 and I can not
on 19/05/2006 18:35 Andriy Gapon said the following:
on 19/05/2006 17:54 [LoN]Kamikaze said the following:
Andriy Gapon wrote:
[Disclaimer, just in case: I do mean APIC, not ACPI]
Based on that info and the linux patch in that thread I came up with the
following PCI fixup. Now I am running
It seems that UDF fs has been in not-well-supported state for a while
now. It seems that Scott Long, original author and maintainer, has moved
on to other more important (and, perhaps, interesting) things.
(perhaps - because RE does not seem to be too exciting on the first
glance)
Meanwhile,
On May 23, 2006, at 4:31 PM, Kirk Strauser wrote:
Has anyone else seen this behavior when upgrading from 6.0 to 6.1?
Any
ideas for a fix?
no. not seen it.
did you have a custom kernel with higher SHM settings on 6.0?
In any case, here is what you do:
in /etc/sysctl.conf add these:
On May 24, 2006, at 2:34 AM, Claus Guttesen wrote:
Thank you. I wasn't aware that one could alter sysctl's. I might dive
into that, makes kernel-maintenance a tiny bit easier.
Boy does it. I've recently combined all my custom kernels into a
single semi-custom configuration (actually two,
[ CC: Bruce ]
Bruce,
On Wed, 24 May 2006, 16:17+0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
It seems that UDF fs has been in not-well-supported state for a while
now. It seems that Scott Long, original author and maintainer, has moved
on to other more important (and, perhaps, interesting) things.
(perhaps -
Hi,
I've just seen the following panic on a dual cpu amd64 box:
FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE #0: Sun May 7 04:15:57 UTC 2006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP amd64
Panic happened during cd /usr/port/databases/mysql4-server make
install - box was otherwise idle.
TPTE at
Hello!
I am running FreeBSD 6-STABLE (last update 14.5.06) on a Fujitsu Siemens
Amilo A notebook. This machine has internet access via kppp and a
Creative ModemBlaster V.92 serial modem.
Sometimes when surfing on the internet (most times with Opera 8.51
AFAIR) the system completly locks up and
Sometime ago and have setup 5.3-STABLE box with quotas for jailed users. At
that time
quotas did not work inside jails, so i just created some group on host machine
and
group with the same ID inside jail and then put a quota upon that group on the
host box.
That was quotas are observed.
On Wednesday 24 May 2006 09:11, Vivek Khera wrote:
no. not seen it.
did you have a custom kernel with higher SHM settings on 6.0?
Nope. I didn't touch the kernel config at all (it includes GENERIC and then
adds a couple of nonrelated settings).
In any case, here is what you do:
Bumping
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rong-en Fan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/14/06, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, May 14, 2006 at 02:28:55PM -0400, Howard Leadmon wrote:
[...]
Use tcpdump and related tools to find out what traffic is being sent.
Also verify that you did not change your system configuration
Hello Rong-en,
As an update, I did the below, and I still had the issue with either version
of vfs_lookup.c compiled in and running.
On the bright side, I didn't realize you could step through the cvs by date,
guess I just never paid attention. So I just stepped back to 'tag=RELENG_6
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Damian Gerow wrote:
Thus spake O. Hartmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [22/05/06 20:23]:
: Is there a solution on its way? What is about the Berkeley native nfe-code?
As someone already pointed out, the fix is already in -CURRENT. A patch for
-STABLE
Another data point:
One of our NFS servers is an amd64 based system serving a cluster of web and
email servers. Under 6.1-RCx it gave us the same (or better) performance than
the server it replaced (which was 4.11). The server load hovered between 0.x
and 1.x
But after upping it to 6.1-STABLE
On an older i386 box (Pentium III), used as a workstation, we have been
running FreeBSD_4.x and 5.x for a long time without problems.
Now, using cvsup, we updated FreeBSD source from
5.4p14 (default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_4) to
6.1 (default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_1_0_RELEASE)
and updated the
On May 24, 2006, at 12:14 PM, Kirk Strauser wrote:
Is any of this stuff well documented other than in NOTES? I can
see what
each setting does, but don't really have a feel for *why* I'd need to
increase a given setting, what the drawback is to increasing it, or
why it
was so low in the
Kirk Strauser wrote:
Bumping shmall did the trick, but semmsl was pretty low so I bumped it up
just in case.
Is any of this stuff well documented other than in NOTES? I can see what
each setting does, but don't really have a feel for *why* I'd need to
increase a given setting, what the
On 24 May 2006, at 7:28 AM, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On Tue, 2006-May-23 19:04:18 +, Hunter Fuller wrote:
Am I the only one who sees the oxymoronity in 6.1-stable crash?
Hopefully.
As is regularly pointed out, 'stable' refers primarily to the ABI.
I was just trying to make people chuckle
I need to follow up to the below, as I am not sure why the below test with
the vfs_lookup.c didn't pan out the first time, but with my new found
knowledge on cvs I was determined to regress the system till I found the
smoking gun so to speak, which I have done.
First let me say that instead of
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 11:48:53PM -0400, Howard Leadmon wrote:
So what's changed at that delta, under the one that works vfs_lookup.c is:
Edit src/sys/kern/vfs_lookup.c
Add delta 1.80.2.6 2006.03.31.07.39.24 kris
Under the one that fails the vfs_lookup.c is:
Edit
30 matches
Mail list logo
