Dear colleagues,
do you have any suggestions about how I should trace what condition
generates kernel panic with reason kmem_map too small?
Operating system is FreeBSD 6.2-p8, no unusual software runs on this
machine -- it runs Asterisk with dummy Zapata driver, FreeRADIUS v1.1.7,
MySQL
В Пт, 16/11/2007 в 09:16 +0100, Kris Kennaway пишет:
Check the archives, this comes up a lot (you need to increase the amount
of memory allocated to the kernel).
Already did.
The question actually is how much memory I should allocate for
kernel (exactly, what numbers should be placed
Am Donnerstag, 15. November 2007 20:34:57 schrieb Dennis Melentyev:
You need to check is it FAT12 or FAT16 on a card. AFAIR fdisk can show
this info.
It's a FAT16 when formatted by the phone software (I checked that initially),
but I can format the stick as FAT32 (by using newfs_msdos on the
Hello, Jack.
You wrote 16 ?? 2007 ?., 0:11:32:
OK, then we really have no control in the experiment, it could be
bad hardware.
Oh! I can plug it into my desktop and boot from LiveCD with FreeBSD
6.2 Release. I'll try it this night.
--
// Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov [EMAIL
Colin Percival wrote:
A quick heads-up to everyone here using my new FreeBSD Update upgrade
code: If you have performed a minor version upgrade (e.g., 6.2-RELEASE -
6.3-BETA1 or 7.0-BETA1.5 - 7.0-BETA2) please do not attempt to roll it
back using freebsd-update rollback.
That code is
Thu, 15 Nov 2007 22:31:19 + (GMT)
Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I feel that the 7.0 kernel will prove to be one of our most stable,
not to mention most performant, .0 releases to date.
Unfortunately, that's not true. For example, parallel printing
crashes my amd64 system since
Has anyone tried the present ath driver with the mini-pc card described
as .. Netegriti 802.11n 802.11g 802.11b 802.11a Turbo Mini PCI Wireless
Card and advertised at
http://discountechnology.com/Netegriti-802-11n-802-11g-802-11b-802-11a-Turbo-Mini-PCI-Wireless-Card
It appears to be based on the
Andrew Kolchoogin wrote:
В Пт, 16/11/2007 в 09:16 +0100, Kris Kennaway пишет:
Check the archives, this comes up a lot (you need to increase the amount
of memory allocated to the kernel).
Already did.
The question actually is how much memory I should allocate for
kernel (exactly, what
On Nov 16, 2007 11:51 AM, Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Before read your message I updated the system again (csup, buildworld,
buildkernel, installkernel, installworld) and now I can reproduce the panic
anymore.
Sorry, just to
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Before read your message I updated the system again (csup, buildworld,
buildkernel, installkernel, installworld) and now I can reproduce the panic
anymore.
Sorry, just to clarify: you now cannot reproduce the panic, or you can still
On Nov 15, 2007 1:11 PM, Jack Vogel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 15, 2007 12:54 PM, Lev Serebryakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello, Jack.
You wrote 15 ?? 2007 ?., 23:52:36:
Have you tried this NIC on anything previously, an older release?
No... And I don't have spare computer
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 12:17:59PM +0100, Søren Schmidt wrote:
I'd figure that the problem is that the geode chip doesn't support 128
sector writes just up to 126, that is not honered from the dump rutine
IIRC.
Not only the dump routine fails, so does savecore(8):
Physical memory: 251 MB
On Sat, Nov 17, 2007 at 04:53:22AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
Behaviour like this should be expected on i386 but not on amd64. It
gives the well-known property of the sin() function, that sin(x) != sin(x)
for almost all x (!). It happens because expressions _may_ be evaluated
in extra precision
Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
Colin Percival wrote:
I believe that your system is now 6.3-BETA1 with a few shared libraries
from 6.2-RELEASE mixed in. If you can get a copy of /lib/*.so.* and
/usr/lib/*.so.* from a 6.3-BETA1 system and install those into place
(in fact, probably all you need
Hello Heiko,
Yes, you really have different issue. From now on, I have no more
ideas. Hope you'll find the root of the problem.
2007/11/16, Heiko Wundram (Beenic) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Am Donnerstag, 15. November 2007 20:34:57 schrieb Dennis Melentyev:
You need to check is it FAT12 or FAT16 on a
Michael Butler wrote:
Has anyone tried the present ath driver with the mini-pc card described
as .. Netegriti 802.11n 802.11g 802.11b 802.11a Turbo Mini PCI Wireless
Card and advertised at
http://discountechnology.com/Netegriti-802-11n-802-11g-802-11b-802-11a-Turbo-Mini-PCI-Wireless-Card
It
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On Sat, Nov 17, 2007 at 04:53:22AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
Behaviour like this should be expected on i386 but not on amd64. It
gives the well-known property of the sin() function, that sin(x) != sin(x)
for almost all x (!). It happens because
I am beginning to dabble with NFSv4 client functionality. I noticed
idmapd is not built in -stable but it has been in -current since
src/sbin/Makefile
v. 1.163 (13 months ago). Should it be hooked up to the build? Thanks
___
It was initially brought in by Alfred but I don't think anyone has
done much work on NFSv4 on FreeBSD. It would be nice to have.
-Kip
On Nov 16, 2007 5:31 PM, Adam McDougall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am beginning to dabble with NFSv4 client functionality. I noticed
idmapd is not built in
19 matches
Mail list logo
