% uname -a
FreeBSD cobalt 9.2-RC3 FreeBSD 9.2-RC3 #0 r254795: Sat Aug 24 20:25:04 UTC 2013
r...@bake.isc.freebsd.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
% clang++ --version
FreeBSD clang version 3.3 (tags/RELEASE_33/final 183502) 20130610
Target: x86_64-unknown-freebsd9.2
Thread model: posix
% uname -a
FreeBSD cobalt.corp.nai.org 9.2-RC3 FreeBSD 9.2-RC3 #0 r254795: Sat Aug 24
20:25:04 UTC 2013 r...@bake.isc.freebsd.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC
amd64
% clang++ --version
FreeBSD clang version 3.3 (tags/RELEASE_33/final 183502) 20130610
Target: x86_64-unknown-freebsd9.2
% uname -a
FreeBSD cobalt 9.2-RC3 FreeBSD 9.2-RC3 #0 r254795: Sat Aug 24 20:25:04 UTC 2013
r...@bake.isc.freebsd.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
% clang++ --version
FreeBSD clang version 3.3 (tags/RELEASE_33/final 183502) 20130610
Target: x86_64-unknown-freebsd9.2
Thread model: posix
list, please pardon
my stupid mail client hung, giving me impression that e-mail was not sent.
apologies for spam.
- Original Message -
From: Quark unixuser2000-f...@yahoo.com
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, 27 August 2013 12:52 PM
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 15:22:49 +0800 (SGT) Quark wrote:
% uname -a
FreeBSD cobalt 9.2-RC3 FreeBSD 9.2-RC3 #0 r254795: Sat Aug 24 20:25:04 UTC
2013 r...@bake.isc.freebsd.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
% clang++ --version
FreeBSD clang version 3.3 (tags/RELEASE_33/final 183502)
AFAIK, the easiest way to get C++11 support in clang is to use libc++ (see
http://blogs.freebsdish.org/theraven/2013/01/03/the-new-c-stack-in-9-1/).
See also
https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-toolchain/2013-May/000841.html .
2013/8/27 Quark unixuser2000-f...@yahoo.com
% uname -a
- Original Message -
From: Tijl Coosemans t...@coosemans.org
To: Quark unixuser2000-f...@yahoo.com
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Tuesday, 27 August 2013 1:41 PM
Subject: Re: c++11 question: clang++ 3.3 future header not found
On Tue, 27
Hello
I've noticed that many ports are using ${.CURDIR}/../../some/port
construction in their Makefiles.
But if you copy on of these ports elsewhere it won't work as expected
because of the relative path.
Shouldn't they use ${PORTSDIR}/some/port instead?
Thanks for the replies.
Kozlov
Hi guys,
I have just purchased a TEMPer1 for monitoring the temperature of our rack.
I have been looking at way of getting this working as the default
drivers pick it up as a keyboard and mouse.
Aug 27 12:13:41 test-1 kernel: ukbd0: RDing TEMPer1V1.2, class 0/0, rev
2.00/0.01, addr 2 on
On 27/08/2013 13:04, Koslov Sergey wrote:
Hello
I've noticed that many ports are using ${.CURDIR}/../../some/port
construction in their Makefiles.
But if you copy on of these ports elsewhere it won't work as expected
because of the relative path.
Shouldn't they use ${PORTSDIR}/some/port
http://www.freebsd.org/security/rss.xml
?
Peter
On 21/08/2013 09:54, Antonio Kless wrote:
Is there any way to be noticed, when security updates or new releases are
available?
https://twitter.com/freebsd nearly would be a solution, if it did not
repostquestions from its
subscribers and
I've got a system running on a VPS that I'm trying to upgrade from 8.2
to 8.4. It has a ZFS root. After booting the new kernel, I get:
Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode
cpuid = 0; apic id = 00
fault virtual address = 0x40
fault code = supervisor read data, page not
snmpd.config is standard
[alexus@f9 ~]$ head -1 /etc/snmpd.config
# $FreeBSD: release/9.1.0/etc/snmpd.config 216595 2010-12-20 17:28:15Z
syrinx $
[alexus@f9 ~]$
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:03 PM, alexus ale...@gmail.com wrote:
f9# gdb `which bsnmpd` /bsnmpd.core
GNU gdb 6.1.1 [FreeBSD]
Hi,
I have a machine with several public IPs on the same NIC and I bound
one of those IPs to a jail created with EzJail. Suppose the scenario
is something like this:
em0
190.100.100.1
190.100.100.2
190.100.100.3
190.100.100.4
In the jail we are bound only to 190.100.100.4
The default router is
El 27/08/2013 05:03, alexus ale...@gmail.com escribió:
f9# gdb `which bsnmpd` /bsnmpd.core
GNU gdb 6.1.1 [FreeBSD]
Copyright 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and you
are
welcome to change it and/or distribute copies of it
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Alejandro Imass aim...@yabarana.com wrote:
Hi,
I have a machine with several public IPs on the same NIC and I bound
one of those IPs to a jail created with EzJail. Suppose the scenario
is something like this:
em0
190.100.100.1
190.100.100.2
190.100.100.3
That's not the behaviour I see. My jail has a private and public IP.
$ ifconfig bce1
bce1: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
options=c01bbRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO,LINKSTATE
ether a4:ba:db:29:7a:1b
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Patrick gibblert...@gmail.com wrote:
That's not the behaviour I see. My jail has a private and public IP.
Hi Patrick, thanks for your reply.
The issue is actually more basic and it's because the same network
card has multiple IPs on the same subnet so the
FreeBSD announce mailing list...
Sexurity announcement (at least) are also cross posted on FreeBSD questions.
Olivier
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Zyumbilev, Peter
pe...@aboutsupport.com wrote:
http://www.freebsd.org/security/rss.xml
?
Peter
On 21/08/2013 09:54, Antonio Kless wrote:
Hi Alejandro,
That's how I've got things setup, too, but I'm not seeing the same
behaviour. So I was wondering if there was something different about
your setup such as using NAT to allow a jail with a private IP to
access the internet at large.
Patrick
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:42 PM,
I just did a portsnap run that updated the base port system.
Now I see a port's distfile going to /var/ports/distfiles instead of
/usr/ports/distfiles.
Is this a error in the newly updated base port system which contains the
default port make environment?
One last comment, for the records,
Those solutions sound pretty handy if I need to move the files at the
same time. mtree should do this in-place with minimal fuss as it's just
confirming permissions and ownership on all files.
I also just thought of an idea I need to benchmark: running mtree
22 matches
Mail list logo