On 21 November 2012 20:16, Ian Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:08:42 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > .. because some of us like kernel behaviour to be predictable and
> > controllable, rather than 'just be dynamic here, what could possibly
> > go wrong.'
> >
> > Just bump the default ker
Dearest people,
I'm trying to get FreeBSD (back) into a couple orders of magnitude
more devices than you're thinking about.
When we talk about "the masses", let's keep in mind that we have
different ideas of what "the masses" are.
I'm trying to keep all of them in mind, rather than just the subs
On 22/11/2012, at 14:46, Ian Smith wrote:
> Dumping all nodes and channels is incredibly useful for folks needing to
> rewire something to get various jacks working and such, but I'd argue is
> way overkill for a 'normal' verbose boot. See acpi(4) for examples of
> selectively logging ACPI_DE
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:08:42 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> .. because some of us like kernel behaviour to be predictable and
> controllable, rather than 'just be dynamic here, what could possibly
> go wrong.'
>
> Just bump the default kernel buffer size up to 64k and leave it
> hard-coded lik
Hi All,
I've a bit of an odd query which I hope somebody may be able to
assist with.
I'm looking to set up several OpenVPN tunnels on a single machine
(each residing in its own jail) and route data to different
destinations over different tunnels by selectively routing the traffic
via a part
+1 (RAM is neither free nor abundant.)
Increasing the default buffers, stack or heap use, should be carefully
considered. There was a discussion about providing guidance/examples for
loader.conf and sysctl.conf for various anticipated uses: firewall,
workstation, servers, routers whether single/
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:49:21AM +0900, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 02:59:34PM -0500, Richard Kuhns wrote:
> > On 11/20/12 03:52, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:30:04AM -0500, Richard Kuhns wrote:
> > >> Hi all,
> > >>
> > >> Over the last month or so I
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 02:59:34PM -0500, Richard Kuhns wrote:
> On 11/20/12 03:52, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:30:04AM -0500, Richard Kuhns wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Over the last month or so I've installed FreeBSD 9 (-stable) on several Mac
> >> Minis via the memstick
On 2012-11-21 21:08, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> .. because some of us like kernel behaviour to be predictable and
> controllable, rather than 'just be dynamic here, what could possibly
> go wrong.'
>
> Just bump the default kernel buffer size up to 64k and leave it
> hard-coded like that. Us embedded p
.. because some of us like kernel behaviour to be predictable and
controllable, rather than 'just be dynamic here, what could possibly
go wrong.'
Just bump the default kernel buffer size up to 64k and leave it
hard-coded like that. Us embedded people can drop that down to
something smaller.
There
On 11/20/12 03:52, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:30:04AM -0500, Richard Kuhns wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Over the last month or so I've installed FreeBSD 9 (-stable) on several Mac
>> Minis via the memstick image; they seem to be pretty good little boxes for
>> things like offsite
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 19:41:42 +0100, Torfinn Ingolfsen
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:25:22 +0100
Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
Why bother...
Because FreeBSD also runs on hardware with minimal memory?
yes, but defaults should be for the masses and it is tunable for the rest
Because FreeBSD
On 21 November 2012 09:25, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
> Why bother...
> Memory is so cheap these days. We're talking about 64Kb being "wasted".
> On average I would assume that there is more than this wasted in odd
> bits and pieces in the kernel.
.. and some of us are actively trying to trim th
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:25:22 +0100
Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
>
> Why bother...
Because FreeBSD also runs on hardware with minimal memory?
Because FreeBSD is a stable, sane operating system and we want to keep it that
way?
Because it breaks POLA?
Because it make developers act sloppy?
I'm sor
on 21/11/2012 20:15 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
> On 2012-11-21 19:11, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> on 21/11/2012 20:08 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
>>> On 2012-11-21 19:05, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 21/11/2012 19:48 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
>> [snip]
> It seem
On 2012-11-21 19:11, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/11/2012 20:08 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
>> On 2012-11-21 19:05, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>> on 21/11/2012 19:48 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
> [snip]
It seems to to be waiting/working in the ZFS code to get things unmounted.
on 21/11/2012 20:08 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
> On 2012-11-21 19:05, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> on 21/11/2012 19:48 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
[snip]
>>> It seems to to be waiting/working in the ZFS code to get things unmounted.
>>
>> Yeah, oops, this is a known ZFS deadlock
On 2012-11-21 19:05, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/11/2012 19:48 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
>> On 2012-11-21 18:27, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
>>> On 2012-11-21 18:11, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 21/11/2012 19:09 Andriy Gapon said the following:
> on 21/11/2012 19:06 Willem Jan Witha
On 2012-11-21 18:11, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/11/2012 19:09 Andriy Gapon said the following:
>> on 21/11/2012 19:06 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
>>> Nothing that stands out for me, but then I'm not into FreeBSD kernels.
>>> But there is certainly no more userspace processes running ot
On 2012-11-21 18:09, Ian Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:08:12 +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > on 21/11/2012 18:01 Ian Lepore said the following:
> > > You know what would be great? Have this value auto-tune itself upwards
> > > if bootverbose is true.
> >
> > This sounds /potentially/
on 21/11/2012 19:09 Andriy Gapon said the following:
> on 21/11/2012 19:06 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
>> Nothing that stands out for me, but then I'm not into FreeBSD kernels.
>> But there is certainly no more userspace processes running other than
>> reboot.
>>
>> Certainly no pos
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:08:12 +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/11/2012 18:01 Ian Lepore said the following:
> > You know what would be great? Have this value auto-tune itself upwards
> > if bootverbose is true.
>
> This sounds /potentially/ neat.
>
> > The sound drivers now spit out so m
on 21/11/2012 19:06 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
> Nothing that stands out for me, but then I'm not into FreeBSD kernels.
> But there is certainly no more userspace processes running other than
> reboot.
>
> Certainly no postfix, that could complain about missing libpcre.so.1
> That
On 2012-11-21 16:10, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/11/2012 11:55 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
>> Hoi,
>>
>> I'm building some new hardware for a customer, and given that 9.1 is
>> about to be around the corner, I installed 9.1-stable.
>>
>> svn from last night
>>
>> Trouble is that a r
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 06:08:12PM +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/11/2012 18:01 Ian Lepore said the following:
> > You know what would be great? Have this value auto-tune itself upwards
> > if bootverbose is true.
>
> This sounds /potentially/ neat.
I do not want the bootverbose knob suddentl
on 21/11/2012 18:01 Ian Lepore said the following:
> You know what would be great? Have this value auto-tune itself upwards
> if bootverbose is true.
This sounds /potentially/ neat.
> The sound drivers now spit out so much stuff
> with bootverbose true that you need like a 128k buffer to see the
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 16:51 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
> On 2012-11-21 16:08, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > on 21/11/2012 15:20 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
> >> On 2012-11-21 11:14, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> >>> On 2012-Nov-21 10:57:49 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen
> >>> wrote:
> Proba
On 2012-11-21 16:08, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/11/2012 15:20 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
>> On 2012-11-21 11:14, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>>> On 2012-Nov-21 10:57:49 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
Probably because the kernelbuffer for it is too small.
I know there used to be
On 2012-11-21 16:10, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/11/2012 11:55 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
>> Hoi,
>>
>> I'm building some new hardware for a customer, and given that 9.1 is
>> about to be around the corner, I installed 9.1-stable.
>>
>> svn from last night
>>
>> Trouble is that a r
on 21/11/2012 11:55 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
> Hoi,
>
> I'm building some new hardware for a customer, and given that 9.1 is
> about to be around the corner, I installed 9.1-stable.
>
> svn from last night
>
> Trouble is that a reboot takes for ever...
> Same with shutdown -r
on 21/11/2012 15:20 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
> On 2012-11-21 11:14, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>> On 2012-Nov-21 10:57:49 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
>>> Probably because the kernelbuffer for it is too small.
>>> I know there used to be a kernel option to increase it.
>>> But I can n
On 2012-11-21 11:14, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2012-Nov-21 10:57:49 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
>> Probably because the kernelbuffer for it is too small.
>> I know there used to be a kernel option to increase it.
>> But I can not find it with the setting in NOTES or any other place I
>> looke
Andre
I'll try to do it today or next monday when I get back from vacation . They
are all hp branded nic's . I ordered them with in the last few years to use in
place of bce nic's on the main boards of hp servers .
---
On Nov 14, 2012, at 5:31 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Hello
>
> I cur
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Frank Seltzer wrote:
> Following that with 'grep -A1 C\ stat' shows 217 lines similar to these:
>
> D C accessibility
> > local unversioned, incoming add upon update
This says that svn has an entry for a file/directory named
'accessibility', but that a
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 09:44:22 +0100, Frank Seltzer
wrote:
On Tue, 20 Nov 2012, Sergey V. Dyatko wrote:
Can you run `svn status`? What does it show ?
-- wbr, tiger
'svn status > stat' creates a 5.5 meg file mostly consisting of lines
like:
D Mk/bsd.apache.mk
D Mk/bsd.auto
On 2012-Nov-21 10:57:49 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
>Probably because the kernelbuffer for it is too small.
>I know there used to be a kernel option to increase it.
>But I can not find it with the setting in NOTES or any other place I
>looked
# Size of the kernel message buffer. Should
Hoi,
I'm building some new hardware for a customer, and given that 9.1 is
about to be around the corner, I installed 9.1-stable.
svn from last night
Trouble is that a reboot takes for ever...
Same with shutdown -r now...
What happens is:
services get killed
we end with all b
Hi,
As a next question to my building this server.
I'm nogt able to get a full verbose dmesg.
Probably because the kernelbuffer for it is too small.
I know there used to be a kernel option to increase it.
But I can not find it with the setting in NOTES or any other place I
looked
Is it stil
On Tue, 20 Nov 2012, Sergey V. Dyatko wrote:
Can you run `svn status`? What does it show ?
--
wbr, tiger
'svn status > stat' creates a 5.5 meg file mostly consisting of lines
like:
D Mk/bsd.apache.mk
D Mk/bsd.autotools.mk
D Mk/bsd.cmake.mk
D Mk/bsd.commands.mk
D
39 matches
Mail list logo
