They found it... :)
-Toby.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Brynet bry...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems boot(8) on i386/amd64 has an undocumented feature that is
occasionally handy. This adds a small blurb to the man pages for both
so that people can find it.
-Bryan.
Index:
A single user shell is the shell you get if you boot with the -s
flag, not the way your system is usually running.
-Toby.
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:02 AM, sven falempin sven.falem...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
For obscure reason i would like to have a root shell with no login on the
com port.
I
There is really only one know good firewall that works 100% of the time...
-Toby.
irrespective of all the talk going on here... :)
-Toby.
I like what I see. It could be the start for the means of managing a single
socket's queue of processes. You do mention that this won't really scale
beyond roughly 8 cores. I would love to see you extend this with a 2D
array of weights that can be populated by various means (run-time testing,
I'm sure you did. Did you test it with one patched and one not?
-Toby.
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Stefan Rinkes
stefan.rin...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 9:42 PM, Tobias Weingartner weing...@tepid.org
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Stefan Rinkes
stefan.rin
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Stefan Rinkes
stefan.rin...@googlemail.com wrote:
while playing around with carp and pfsync I spotted
two minor bugs.
1. Not all pfstate flags are synced, cause pfsync uses
u_int8_t, while pf uses u_int16_t for state_flags.
Currently that means
On Saturday, April 2, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
FreeBSD which is the origin of FFS does a
background fsck, and if Kirk McCusick feels so strongly I will do it
too.
FreeBSD was not the origin of the FFS code. Background fsck in freebsd
is mainly meant to reduce the amount of time it takes to get
On Wednesday, March 23, David Vasek wrote:
As majority of current hardware use some form of dynamic CPU frequency
scaling and it is frequently controlled by ampd, wouldn't it be good to
have the current hw.cpuspeed displayed somewhere in the header lines of
systat(1) and top(1)? Just to
On Wednesday, March 23, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
Never know what they can do. But the current max is 6 GHz by IBM for
any core, right? :)
The majority of current hardware do per core frequency scaling (or
bursting), but hw.cpuspeed is reporting the BIOS CPU speed
(considering over and under
On Friday, February 4, Henning Brauer wrote:
i don't think there is is special treatment for the carp group. but
memory is fuzzy. we might very well forget to clean up when a group
becomes empty.
There is a bit of an inconsistency when it comes to
'ifconfig foo' style of the ifconfig
On Wednesday, December 15, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
The real work on OCF did not begin in earnest until February 2000.
I can't see how this gives you credibility but maybe the people who
worked with you at the time can understand how your evidence supports
what you say.
I've known Jason for
On Thursday, December 2, David Gwynne wrote:
the boot loader passes a variable that identifies the disk its
booting off made up of a bunch of fields like adapter, controller,
disk, and partition offsets, plus a table of all the disks it can
see which includes this id and a checksum.
Not sure if anyone has responded yet... been a while since I've
actually had time to read any of these lists. :(
Anyways, comments inline
On Friday, August 20, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
Index: crypto/cryptodev.h
===
RCS file:
On Wednesday, June 30, Darrin Chandler wrote:
What you're saying is true, but that's not the only use case. Streaming
media may not benefit from 100% cpu but may not be able to work properly
at 0%. The same goes for other common tasks as well. Running at 30% or
50% will indeed save power for
On Wednesday, June 23, Daniel Dickman wrote:
Index: amd64/stand/libsa/memprobe.c
===
RCS file: /usr/cvs/src/sys/arch/amd64/stand/libsa/memprobe.c,v
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -u -r1.6 memprobe.c
---
On Monday, April 19, Adam M. Dutko wrote:
1) Are there areas that are easier for relative newbies to start in versus
other areas? I know this depends on a lot of things, to include experience.
Hypothetically, someone that has some C experience, but not a lot of kernel
(and subsystem)
On Monday, March 1, Giuseppe Magnotta wrote:
+/*
+ * Author: Giuseppe Magnotta giuseppe.magno...@gmail.com
While I applaud your efforts to send in patches, I do have a
small niggle. Why do you feel the need to splatter your
authorship all over the code in comments? Why not just add
your
On Monday, March 1, Giuseppe Magnotta wrote:
My question is, if this functionality is available in the BIOS, why
can't we use it?
The problem is having a broken BIOS out there that simply hangs
because you're calling something that it does not support. When
this stuff was written, there were
On Saturday, February 20, Giuseppe Magnotta wrote:
The original source is $OpenBSD: mbr.S,v 1.21 2007/06/25 14:10:17 tom
Exp $ fetched from 4.6 release.
I hope this can be useful...
Best Regards
Giuseppe
The patch is:
diff mbr.S.orig mbr.S:
Ugh... please send 'diff -u'
I like it... for the most part.
On Saturday, February 20, Giuseppe Magnotta wrote:
Index: mbr.S
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch/i386/stand/mbr/mbr.S,v
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -r1.21 mbr.S
--- mbr.S 25 Jun 2007
On Saturday, February 20, Ted Unangst wrote:
Is this really an improvement? If I have two bootable partitions, at
least one of them will boot now, letting me fix the problem. If you
refuse to boot, now I need to dig around in my toy box for a floppy
drive or something before I can fix it.
On Saturday, February 20, Miod Vallat wrote:
There's a huge difference between garbage in the mbr, and user error
causing two partitions to be marked as active.
From the point of view of the MBR, not really. They're both
corruption. One just happens to be more likely to be survivable,
but
On Saturday, February 20, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
I vote with Ted. Booting, even the wrong partition, seems better to me
than not booting anything.
The MBR is not really supposed to boot if it is corrupted. There
are plenty of MBR codes out there that check for this condition,
and will
On Friday, October 30, Remco wrote:
I don't know if this is still relevant but I noticed that the Pentium III
processor serial number isn't disabled for model 8 processors.
(patch was tested on 4.6-STABLE)
Index: sys/arch/i386/i386/machdep.c
25 matches
Mail list logo
