Re: gpart -b 34 versus gpart -b 1024

On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Adam Vande More wrote: > On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Dan Langille wrote: > >>       ---Sequential Output ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- >>       -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- >>    GB M/sec %CPU M/sec %CPU M

Re: gpart -b 34 versus gpart -b 1024

On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 2:22 AM, Edho P Arief wrote: > > shouldn't it start at 2049? Starting at 2048 means it starts at 2048th > logical block which is 512 bytes off from physical block, doesn't it? > > blocks start at 0 -- Adam Vande More ___

Re: gpart -b 34 versus gpart -b 1024

On Sun, 25 Jul 2010, Adam Vande More wrote: AVM> > AVM> > shouldn't it start at 2049? Starting at 2048 means it starts at 2048th AVM> > logical block which is 512 bytes off from physical block, doesn't it? AVM> > AVM> > AVM> AVM> blocks start at 0 Well, to be exact,

Re: SIGEPIPE after update to 8.1-RC2

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 12:20:33PM +1000, Sean wrote: > I'm getting the same thing; what shell are you using? I changed my shell > on one machine from /bin/tcsh to /usr/local/bin/bash and problem > disappeared. That this workaround helps confirms that masked/ignored SIGPIPE is the problem. From

Re: no updates?

Did my last post get cut off? Still getting used to this Andriod. On Jul 21, 2010 3:13 PM, "Chip Camden" wrote: This is probably a stupid question, but I haven't received any csup updates for a couple of days now, even though I've seen quite a few commits on the list. I'm using the cvs tag=RELE

Re: no updates?

Still no updates? How are you running the update? (command line or cron or ?) How are you specifying the host? (-h or editing the *default host line) On Jul 21, 2010 3:13 PM, "Chip Camden" wrote: This is probably a stupid question, but I haven't received any csup updates for a couple of days no

Re: no updates?

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 01:13:01PM -0700, Chip Camden wrote: > This is probably a stupid question, but I haven't received any csup > updates for a couple of days now, even though I've seen quite a few > commits on the list. I'm using the cvs tag=RELENG_8 > > I've tried both cvsup4.freebsd.org and

Re: no updates?

Quoth Beach Geek on Sunday, 25 July 2010: > Still no updates? > How are you running the update? (command line or cron or ?) > How are you specifying the host? (-h or editing the *default host line) > > On Jul 21, 2010 3:13 PM, "Chip Camden" wrote: > > This is probably a stupid question, but I h

zpool destroy causes panic

freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=1007077+0+archive/2010/freebsd-stable/20100725.freebsd-stable The two tmp files were created via: dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/sparsefile1.img bs=1 count=0 oseek=1862g dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/sparsefile2.img bs=1 count=0 oseek=1862g And the array created with: zpool cr

Re: zpool destroy causes panic

upted data /tmp/sparsefile2.img UNAVAIL 0 0 0 corrupted data errors: No known data errors Why sparse files? See this post: http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=1007077+0+archive/2010/freebsd-stable/20100725.freebsd-stable The two tmp files were created via: dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/spa

Re: zpool destroy causes panic

On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 01:58:34PM -0400, Dan Langille wrote: > [...] > NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM > storage ONLINE 0 0 0 > raidz2 ONLINE 0 0 0 > gpt/disk01ONLI

Re: zpool destroy causes panic

25.07.2010 23:18, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: Footnote: can someone explain to me how ZFS would, upon reboot, know that /tmp/sparsefile[12].img are part of the pool? How would ZFS taste metadata in this situation? Just hacking it. Each ZFS device which is part of the pool tracks all other devices

Re: zpool destroy causes panic

On 7/25/2010 4:37 PM, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote: 25.07.2010 23:18, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: Footnote: can someone explain to me how ZFS would, upon reboot, know that /tmp/sparsefile[12].img are part of the pool? How would ZFS taste metadata in this situation? Just hacking it. Each ZFS device whi

PCI access point card

___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: zpool destroy causes panic

25.07.2010 20:58, Dan Langille wrote: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM storage ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz2 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk01 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk02 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk03 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk04 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk05 ONLINE 0 0 0 /tmp/sparsefile1.img UNAVAIL 0 0 0 corrupted data /tmp/sparsefile2.img

Re: zpool destroy causes panic

On 7/25/2010 4:49 PM, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote: 25.07.2010 20:58, Dan Langille wrote: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM storage ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz2 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk01 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk02 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk03 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk04 ONLINE 0 0 0 gpt/disk05 ONLINE 0 0 0 /tmp/sparsefile1.img

PCI AP card recommendations

Looking for feedback from people using FreeBSD v8.x as access points. We will be using Pentium 3 boxes with 8-STABLE as APs. Each box will have a unique SSID and use WPA2-PSK. Each AP will be linked back to 2 gateways. I'm looking for AP card suggestions and any helpful hints as far as the APs.

Re: zpool destroy causes panic

+0+archive/2010/freebsd-stable/20100725.freebsd-stable The two tmp files were created via: dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/sparsefile1.img bs=1 count=0 oseek=1862g dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/sparsefile2.img bs=1 count=0 oseek=1862g And the array created with: zpool create -f storage raidz2 gpt/disk01 gpt/di

[releng_8_1 tinderbox] failure on amd64/amd64

TB --- 2010-07-25 22:03:44 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2010-07-25 22:03:44 - starting RELENG_8_1 tinderbox run for amd64/amd64 TB --- 2010-07-25 22:03:44 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2010-07-25 22:04:07 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2010-07-25 22:04:07 - /u

Re: gpart -b 34 versus gpart -b 1024

Dmitry Morozovsky wrote: > ... sector numbers (in CHS address method) > [start] at 1 (which always suprized me ;) This goes back at least as far as soft-sectored 8" diskettes in the CP/M era. IIRC, physical sector 0 of each track contained the C number, possibly the H, and a list of the remainin

Re: Confirm your prize

* Sandra Blaze [2010-07-25 11:51:08 -0400]: > Confirm your award prize! > > Online Email Sweepstakes program Cisco Network Inc., > This is to inform you that your Email Address attached to a Ticket > Number(712-118-2010) has won the prize Sum of 500,000.00 Euro (Five hundred > thousand Euro On