swiftgri...@gmail.com (Swift Griggs) writes:
>/dev/sda1 vs /dev/sd1a
>So, they use letters first, then numbers.
Actually that gets more and more unusuable in Linux. You need to
access disks as /dev/disk/by-/YY and partitions with something
like /dev/disk/by-/YY-part1 and you have
Date:Mon, 8 Feb 2016 15:41:41 -0800
From:John Nemeth
Message-ID: <201602082342.u18Ngfw5029915@server>
[Caution: crappy kre memory dump below... treat it as random gibberish...]
| The first release of BSD was in 1977,
That's true, but hardly
On 2016-02-08 21:30, Swift Griggs wrote:
> Can one use the BSD disklabel to fully replace a GPT or MBR table? I
> understand why folks want to move from MBR to GPT, but do the same
> reasons apply to BSD disklabels? In other words, is there any advantage
> to using GPT over BSD diskabels ?
> The
2016-02-08 12:39 GMT+09:00 David H. Gutteridge :
>>> > pflogd process consume CPU.
>>> > Because of that in load average is too high.
>>> > >>> Can you ktrace it?
>>> > >>this is kdump output.
>>> > >>sakura# kdump ktrace.out
>>> > >> 974 1 pflogd EMUL
On 2016-02-09 00:41, John Nemeth wrote:
Those problems could be solved. Obviously, old tools wouldn't
work with the new format; however, new tools could work with either
format. But, the first issue is that it is an on-disk format.
You need to find the space to expand the disklabel and
On Tue, 9 Feb 2016, Christos Zoulas wrote:
OpenBSD has done it. I've made the same code changes but I stopped just
before committing because we have dozens of custom copies of disklabel
code that would need to be adjusted and tested.
Well, not like I have any authority, but I'd welcome that
Have a look here:
http://wiki.tuhs.org/doku.php?id=events:free_licenses
In particular note that in 2002 the copyright owner made the old V7 code
and 32V Unix code available as open source with a BSD-like license.
While 3BSD was derived from 32V, it also included a lot of other code
that was
Of course that is not what I was trying to suggest. Perhaps I should have
made it more clear but I am not trying to void the original licence in any
way shape or form. I am asking because I do not want to.
Though Lyndon you have answered my question. That a project released under
a BSD-style
On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Martin wrote:
> Of course that is not what I was trying to suggest. Perhaps I should
> have made it more clear but I am not trying to void the original
> licence in any way shape or form. I am asking because I do not want
> to. Though Lyndon you have answered my question.
Well it all honesty 3BSD was just an example that came to my head. I am
actually looking at 2.11BSD mostly.
I understand the caldera licence is a bsd-style licence which correct me if
I'm wrong includes 2.11BSD?
So what you are saying is i could create a fork/ continuation of the
2.11BSD under for
10 matches
Mail list logo