Re: Resolution of Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode
* Ernst de Haan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): The most obvious possibility seems to be 'maxusers 0' No. This just means to autoconfigure a value according to the amount of memory present at configure time. --Thomas To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: -STABLE was stable for long time (Re: FreeBSD: Server or Desktop OS?)
* Marc G. Fournier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): What's to track? Nothing happens on that branch ... I just CVSup'd RELEASE, followed by RELENG_4_7 and the only changes were pretty much related to the latest BIND vulnerabilities ... The security branches are fortunately a very slowly moving target for which you can develop and maintain *your* *own* patches. What stops you from doing just this? What keeps you from applying Matt Dillons VM patches to RELENG_4_7? What keeps you from merging new features from -STABLE into your private RELENG-branch? You have chosen to maintain systems which stretch FreeBSD to its limits and uncover bugs lurking in the code. This is great. But you cannot do so on the one hand and refuse to face the administrative work on the other hand. This does not work. You have the freedom to maintain your own release with all the patches and fixes you need. Why don't you do it? Instead you waste your time with complaining (and you waste my time because I have to read it and think about the replies I am going to send)? As for the eroding stability: this is partly true, in my opinion because -CURRENT and -STABLE's codebases have diverted to a great extent. There were so many new CURRENT-only features implemented in the last few months (SMPng, KSE, GCC update, GEOM, ...) which caused more or less grief and instability for a long time. My guess is, that due to this no one using -CURRENT had time to test features which were to be MFC'ed extensively. And due to the ongoing instability of -CURRENT there were probably not enough non-developer users with -CURRENT systems for testing, so probably most things MFC'ed in the last few months got their first round of thorough testing by a wide user base just after the MFC. Anyone remember the ata(4) trouble? I do not know whether the above was true when RELENG_3 was -STABLE; I use FreeBSD only since 4.0. But I think that it could not have been that bad, since I found 4.0 useable. As it seems 5.0 will be shipped with big red warning signs attached :) Purely security vulnerabilities ... no 'critical patches' ... I would consider most anything related to the VM subsystem to be 'critical', at the very least ... Please discuss this with the security officer. --Thomas To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: -STABLE was stable for long time (Re: FreeBSD: Server or Desktop OS?)
* Marc G. Fournier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): On Sun, 17 Nov 2002, Thomas Seck wrote: You have chosen to maintain systems which stretch FreeBSD to its limits and uncover bugs lurking in the code. This is great. But you cannot do so on the one hand and refuse to face the administrative work on the other hand. This does not work. You have the freedom to maintain your own release with all the patches and fixes you need. Why don't you do it? Instead you waste your time with complaining (and you waste my time because I have to read it and think about the replies I am going to send)? But, what you miss in here is that picking and choosing which patches to use is useless, as it doesn't take into consideration the interactions of other patches you don't apply ... or the reliance of future patches that would be useful on those patches you don't apply ... if I wanted to pick-n-choose patches, I'd run Linux ... I choose to run FreeBSD because its an Operating System, not a Kernel with a 101 different distributions Basically, you want others to do the developing, testing and patching and keep the complaining part for yourself. --Thomas To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: strange ATA behavior with -STABLE
* Michiel Boland ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the splx patch does anything to help people with broken CD-ROM drives. You are right. It fixes a coding mistake which panicked boxes using TQ. All other issues are still present. -- Thomas Seck This message was sent to a mailinglist I am subscribed to. Please send your replies to the list only and do *not* CC me. Thank you. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: No root crontab in 4.6-RELEASE?
* Jason Andresen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): [/etc/crontab vs. crontab -u root] ??? More visible? New people to the system can never find that file. Heck, I'm always forgetting where it is. It wouldn't be so bad if it just weren't so inconsistent. See cron(8), second paragraph. -- Thomas Seck This message was sent to a mailinglist I am subscribed to. Please send your replies to the list - and do *not* CC me. Thank you. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD Server and Gateway
* Christian Chen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): So, what I'm actually doing is: 1. Set up NAT to route between my ethernet card and tun0 2. Set up the firewall rules via PPP Ugh. Simply let ppp(8) take care of NAT, do the firewalling with ipfw(8) and you're done. Close to trivial. -- Thomas Seck To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: -PRERELEASE (was: Difference between RELENG_* and RELENG_*_BP)
* Bruce A. Mah ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): If memory serves me right, Aragon Gouveia wrote: Slightly off topic... I just upgraded an fbsd machine of mine to 4.6-PRERELEASE (RELENG_4). What does prerelease mean in FreeBSD terms? Isn't this in the FAQ somewhere? If not, it should be. :-) Of course it is. http://www.freebsd.org/FAQ/admin.html#RELEASE-CANDIDATE --Thomas To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: Strange SCSI error message
On Jun 06 2001, Karsten W. Rohrbach wrote: there were some questions a while ago concerning the freebsd vs linux scenario where a freebsd fails with SCB timeouts while a linux runs along with apparently no problems at all. the quick answer for this particular behaviour in freebsd is, that the io subsystem is designed to put more load onto the scsi devices than the implementation of other os'es io subsystems. so, basically, what happens is, that you only see the timeouts under freebsd, of course, since it arbits the scsi bus more often, and with more data in the same period of time compared to other implementations. Yes, this might well be the problem. What bothers me is that these errors only appeared when the box had been _really_ idle for hours. terminate correctly, symmetric terminators, active, for u160. use good cables, no vobis crap ;-) Vobis? Hey! (Note: Vobis is a chain of computer shops in Germany notorious for selling *really* crappy HW for about 15 years now) i use amphenol cables for external links and gr-kabel (german distributor) for internal wiring. this solved most of my scsi problems with u160. Well, I hope I never have to see these problems again, cross fingers. Thank you for your response and regards from the rainy rhinelands, Thomas Seck To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: HEADS UP: RELNOTESng now default in 4-STABLE, *.TXT files removed
On Jun 05 2001, Bruce A. Mah wrote: [relnotesNG announce] Good work, Bruce. I noticed one minor problem when I tried to build them: I had DOC_LANG=en_US.ISO_8859-1 de_DE.ISO_8859-1 RELNOTES_LANG=en_US.ISO_8859-1 in my /etc/make.conf but making the docs via # cd /usr/src/release/doc # make DOC_PREFIX=/usr/doc all failed because it was trying to build the reldocs for de_DE.ISO_8859-1 too, apparently using DOC_LANG instead of RELNOTES_LANG. Regards, Thomas Seck To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
Re: 4.3-RELEASE kernel freeze(message dumped by ahc driver?)
On Apr 29 2001, ?$B?EDM5G7?(B wrote: Hello, stable-users. I used FreeBSD 4.3-RC(1), and cvsuped with RELENG_4_3_0_RELEASE on 27th Apr, did make world, make kernel, and then reboot on 28th. I thought there was no problem, but 1 day later, kernel logged following message and freeze. ... I have a PR open (kern/26880, unexpected busfree errors), cocerning similar problems with an Adaptec 19160 and Quantum Atlas V discs. Let's see what Justin T. Gibbs says about it. Regards, Thomas Seck To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message
