Re: Sysinstall is still inadequate after all of these years
On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 03:16:27PM -0700, Curtis Penner wrote: Let us take this further. Let's compare BSD to the Linux install solutions. Well, lets not, Linux is so far ahead of BSD. Linux understands the user. Some distros, perhaps, though I'd say that the fact that there is an overwhelming number of distros, with most of them doing things in complete different and incompatible ways,is an indication that the Linux community, in general, does not understand the user any more than the BSD community. That's not to say that I don't think there's a place for a few distros, just as there are a few different flavours of BSD. BSD has a better overall core OS then the other UNIX flavors. The size to capability is outstanding. Once you have the core OS on the system it is rock steady and only getting better. The documentation is outstanding. It is what others should look to. So what is wrong? It doesn't have the native 3rd party applications. Why? Not enough users. Why? Because it is hard to get what you want unless you are tech savvy. Could you explain what you means by It doesn't have the native 3rd party applications. And it's certainly not hard to get what you want. The ports system has 18k ports and is extremely easy to use. Especially when you consider the quality of our documentation, which as you have rightly pointed out, is excellent. When you do a system install it is like jumping back to the 80's. The front-end is like something from the DOS days. You have to be tech savvy to know what you want to do. You have to search out all the variations of the applications (tedious and unnecessary) to get a full package -- Examples: Postgres, PHP, etc. To add wireless (very common these day), you better set aside as much time or more as doing the initial install. Noone is going to argue on the point of sysinstall. But as already mentioned, there are possible replacements in progress. Wireless can also be a little tricky, but I don't believe the situation is any different with Linux. As for the ports, I don't see what your point is. People who know what they require will have no trouble finding it, and if there's anyone out there who panics when confronted with the various versions of postgresql in ports, and doesn't know which to use... why would they be installing it in the first place? Given that the system is rock solid, you think more people would develop on it, at least secondarily. But no. Java - go fish. All the development environments and features that go with it (Eclipse, NetBean, Hibernation, Sturts, and so forth) are painful to get. You feel like a rabbit jumping around, and then it most likely doesn't work. That is such a turn off. I can't comment much on these (don't do Java development) except to say that FreeBSD has good Java support, and that I've installed and used Eclipse on FreeBSD before without hassles. As for the installs, to get an idea of how to package an install, look at the current install packages that are from the Linux side. You don't have to copy, but emulate. (Oh, the best out-of-the-box is Apple.) FreeBSD has packages. They're not the best. They're definitely not the worst. I have installed Linux, MacOS, HPUX, Solaris, Window (NT, XP, Vista), and the BSDs, and I have found the BSDs to be so yesterday that there is little in common with the rest. FUD. FreeBSD is a stable, high performance, modern operating system suitable for server, desktop and laptop use (I do all three). A few parts of the system are due for an overhaul. Porting, so that applications that matter go native, we need more installs and more people on the systems. That means more installs to laptops. The installs have to be seamless and complete. That mean getting more Open Source people and companies to compile and distribute BSD. Yes, that would be great. So if you want to see that, why are you spreading all this FUD? I am looking forward to a time when installing BSD is point and click with not much understanding of what is going on (unless I want to go advance and do special custom work). -Curtis frase pgpoAumHwQeJs.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: How to probe what application does in kernel (with sound device)?
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 12:52:08PM -0700, Yuri wrote: I have linux skype that complains that it can't use sound device without giving any details. 'truss -f' flag doesn't show any system calls related to sound device (/dev/dsp*). Maybe it's because of child processes aren't really monitored by truss for linux processes. But sound from another sound application gets some strange interruption and buzz every time I try to activate sound from skype. That's how I know that skype really does something with sound device. Is there a way to probe program's activity with devices in-kernel? Yuri ktrace(1) From man page: The ktrace utility enables kernel trace logging for the specified pro- cesses. Kernel trace data is logged to the file ktrace.out. The kernel operations that are traced include system calls, namei translations, sig- nal processing, and I/O. frase pgp94m8kxgXAh.pgp Description: PGP signature
temporary freezes when pressing capslock / numlock
Since upgrading to RELENG_7_0 I was experiencing momentary freezes (of about .5 seconds) whenever the capslock or numlock buttons were pressed. I would probably never have noticed it except for the strange noises produced when music is playing, and of course that is when it is the most annoying ;) The issue occurs both in console and in X, and for both ULE and 4BSD. The problem was reproducible with USB keyboards only (ukbd); atkbd seems fine. It also occurs when numlockx is used to set numlock on or off without keyboard interaction. Interestingly, if you add enough keyboards, the problem vanishes, which led me to kbdmux. Sure enough, removing device kbdmux from the kernel makes the problem go away (at the expensive of some functionality of course, but this is my current workaround). Kernel config and dmesg are attached. As you may notice, I enabled kernel lock profiling for the purpose of troubleshooting this issue. I recorded the stats over a single occurance of the glitch. It seems to spend a vast amount of time waiting on giant as compared to any other lock. The output is almost 100k so I've omitted it for now; if it is of use to anyone let me know and I will certainly include it in reply. Fraser Copyright (c) 1992-2008 The FreeBSD Project. Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE-p1 #30: Fri May 23 23:04:55 EST 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CUSTOM Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8200 @ 2.66GHz (2669.34-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0x10676 Stepping = 6 Features=0xbfebfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM,PBE Features2=0x8e3fdSSE3,RSVD2,MON,DS_CPL,VMX,SMX,EST,TM2,SSSE3,CX16,xTPR,PDCM,b19 AMD Features=0x2010NX,LM AMD Features2=0x1LAHF Cores per package: 2 real memory = 2146304000 (2046 MB) avail memory = 2094714880 (1997 MB) ACPI APIC Table: GBTGBTUACPI FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1 ioapic0: Changing APIC ID to 2 ioapic0 Version 2.0 irqs 0-23 on motherboard kbd1 at kbdmux0 acpi0: GBT GBTUACPI on motherboard acpi0: [ITHREAD] acpi0: Power Button (fixed) acpi0: reservation of 0, a (3) failed acpi0: reservation of 10, 7fde (3) failed Timecounter ACPI-fast frequency 3579545 Hz quality 1000 acpi_timer0: 24-bit timer at 3.579545MHz port 0x408-0x40b on acpi0 acpi_hpet0: High Precision Event Timer iomem 0xfed0-0xfed003ff on acpi0 Timecounter HPET frequency 14318180 Hz quality 900 cpu0: ACPI CPU on acpi0 acpi_perf0: ACPI CPU Frequency Control on cpu0 p4tcc0: CPU Frequency Thermal Control on cpu0 cpu1: ACPI CPU on acpi0 est1: Enhanced SpeedStep Frequency Control on cpu1 est: CPU supports Enhanced Speedstep, but is not recognized. est: cpu_vendor GenuineIntel, msr 61a082006000820 device_attach: est1 attach returned 6 p4tcc1: CPU Frequency Thermal Control on cpu1 acpi_button0: Power Button on acpi0 pcib0: ACPI Host-PCI bridge port 0xcf8-0xcff on acpi0 pci0: ACPI PCI bus on pcib0 pcib1: PCI-PCI bridge irq 16 at device 1.0 on pci0 pci1: PCI bus on pcib1 vgapci0: VGA-compatible display port 0xb000-0xb07f mem 0xf600-0xf6ff,0xe000-0xefff,0xf400-0xf5ff irq 16 at device 0.0 on pci1 uhci0: UHCI (generic) USB controller port 0xe100-0xe11f irq 16 at device 26.0 on pci0 uhci0: [GIANT-LOCKED] uhci0: [ITHREAD] usb0: UHCI (generic) USB controller on uhci0 usb0: USB revision 1.0 uhub0: Intel UHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1 on usb0 uhub0: 2 ports with 2 removable, self powered uhci1: UHCI (generic) USB controller port 0xe500-0xe51f irq 21 at device 26.1 on pci0 uhci1: [GIANT-LOCKED] uhci1: [ITHREAD] usb1: UHCI (generic) USB controller on uhci1 usb1: USB revision 1.0 uhub1: Intel UHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1 on usb1 uhub1: 2 ports with 2 removable, self powered uhci2: UHCI (generic) USB controller port 0xe000-0xe01f irq 18 at device 26.2 on pci0 uhci2: [GIANT-LOCKED] uhci2: [ITHREAD] usb2: UHCI (generic) USB controller on uhci2 usb2: USB revision 1.0 uhub2: Intel UHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1 on usb2 uhub2: 2 ports with 2 removable, self powered ehci0: EHCI (generic) USB 2.0 controller mem 0xfa101000-0xfa1013ff irq 18 at device 26.7 on pci0 ehci0: [GIANT-LOCKED] ehci0: [ITHREAD] usb3: EHCI version 1.0 usb3: companion controllers, 2 ports each: usb0 usb1 usb2 usb3: EHCI (generic) USB 2.0 controller on ehci0 usb3: USB revision 2.0 uhub3: Intel EHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 2.00/1.00, addr 1 on usb3 uhub3: 6 ports with 6 removable, self powered pcib2: ACPI PCI-PCI bridge irq 16 at device 28.0 on pci0 pci2: ACPI PCI bus on pcib2 pcib3: ACPI PCI-PCI bridge irq 19
Re: A Tale of Four Kernels...
Wilkinson, Alex wrote: Some may be interested in this. http://www.spinellis.gr/pubs/conf/2008-ICSE-4kernel/html/Spi08b.pdf -aW Interesting study; thanks for posting. frase signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
