I did a cvsup today for -current to compile on my Alphastation 200 4/233 and
douring a make world, this is what I got:
-
===> f77doc
/usr/obj/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/f77doc created for
/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/f77doc
cd /usr/src/gnu/lib/libgcc; /usr/obj/u
> I did a cvsup today for -current to compile on my Alphastation 200 4/233 and
> douring a make world, this is what I got:
You currently have -stable on your box. You cannot do this. Install a
recent -current snapshot and start from there.
--
\\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day.
I'm getting the following error with today's -current sources;
this particular system has a rather strange history, so it may
not be the sources, but something else. I have tried -DNOCRYPT,
which doesn't help. And I've searched the archives without
finding anything directly applicable, so sugges
Shit, I will loose all my custom settings...no other way around this
On 13-Nov-99 Mike Smith wrote:
>> I did a cvsup today for -current to compile on my Alphastation 200 4/233 and
>> douring a make world, this is what I got:
>
> You currently have -stable on your box. You cannot do this. I
William Woods wrote:
>
> Shit, I will loose all my custom settings...no other way around this
Try compiling and installing the kernel first, reboot, buildworld..
should work (did for me but hey, im x86..) NO PROMISES! heh
mike.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscr
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Mike Muir wrote:
> William Woods wrote:
> >
> > Shit, I will loose all my custom settings...no other way around this
>
> Try compiling and installing the kernel first, reboot, buildworld..
> should work (did for me but hey, im x86..) NO PROMISES! heh
This should work (
On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, Vladimir Kushnir wrote:
> Sorry, but is there any driver for YMF724 except for OSS? If so (even in
> some under-pre-alpha state) I'd be more than happy to test it.
I've been working on a driver which would support the 'legacy' (i.e.
soundblaster compatible) section of the ch
On 11 Nov, Harold Gutch wrote:
>> > Using command substitution in /etc/rc.conf{,.local} is NOT
>> > officially supported. I think it should have always been
>> > clear that there should _only_ be plain variable assignments.
>>
>> But with i4b you have to specify a username-password pair in rc.co
On 12 Nov, Robert Watson wrote:
>> >> >> (102) netchild@ttyp2 > grep cat /etc/rc.conf.local
>> >> >> spppconfig_isp0="`cat /etc/isdn/connect.parameters`"
>> >^^^
>> > Calling programs from any of the rc.conf files is considered evil
>> > and it's looked down on.
>>
>> It´s
Also sprach Alexander Leidinger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > What about /etc/start_if.isp0?
> Yes, with permissions of u+r,go-rwx it´s more secure than the currently
> recommended way.
> Hellmuth? Will this be the new official way of configuring i4b?
A second advantage: You can sh /etc/start_if.isp0
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> On 12 Nov, Robert Watson wrote:
>
> >> >> >> (102) netchild@ttyp2 > grep cat /etc/rc.conf.local
> >> >> >> spppconfig_isp0="`cat /etc/isdn/connect.parameters`"
> >> >^^^
> >> > Calling programs from any of the rc.conf file
>From the keyboard of Alexander Leidinger:
> >> But with i4b you have to specify a username-password pair in rc.conf
> >> (spppconfig_isp0) and I didn_t want to show it to every user (rc.conf
> >> is u+rw,g+r,o+r for reasons you mention).
> >
> > What about /etc/start_if.isp0?
>
> Yes, with per
>> "MM" == Marcel Moolenaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MM> After (by accident) compiling world (excluding kernel) with
MM> optimization disabled (ie -O0) and installing the resulting
MM> binaries, xemacs (21.1.7) coredumps with a bus error. I
MM> recompiled and reinstalled xemacs
Peter Mutsaers wrote:
>
> >> "MM" == Marcel Moolenaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> MM> After (by accident) compiling world (excluding kernel) with
> MM> optimization disabled (ie -O0) and installing the resulting
> MM> binaries, xemacs (21.1.7) coredumps with a bus error. I
>
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Doug Rabson wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, Vladimir Kushnir wrote:
>
> > Sorry, but is there any driver for YMF724 except for OSS? If so (even in
> > some under-pre-alpha state) I'd be more than happy to test it.
>
> I've been working on a driver which would support the 'leg
> Attached, in all it's glory.
>
> The relevant lines seem to be:
> controller pnp0
> device pcm0
> options PNPBIOS
>
> The PNPBIOS line doesn't make a difference for the AWE64 (although it does
> make some difference - all the motherboard resources show up as unknowns
> with it enabled).
Yu
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Doug Rabson wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, Vladimir Kushnir wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry, but is there any driver for YMF724 except for OSS? If so (even in
> > > some under-pre-alpha state) I'd be more than happy to test it.
> >
> > I
At 01:05 PM 11/13/1999 -0800, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> > Attached, in all it's glory.
> >
> > The relevant lines seem to be:
> > controller pnp0
> > device pcm0
> > options PNPBIOS
> >
> > The PNPBIOS line doesn't make a difference for the AWE64 (although it does
> > make some difference - all the mo
Hi folks,
Once again, `boot2' is the only thing holding us back from upgrading our
base compiler. The commit below plus -fdata-sections gets us to needing
to reduce another 100 bytes from `boot2'.
This is an appeal to hackers to squeeze another 100 bytes out. It would
be preferable to use the
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, David O'Brien wrote:
> This is an appeal to hackers to squeeze another 100 bytes out. It would
> be preferable to use the ``egcs'' port as the compiler, but I presume
> using the current system compiler would be OK too.
Do you have any idea why the new compiler is generatin
On Sat, Nov 13, 1999 at 04:23:42PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> Do you have any idea why the new compiler is generating so much more code
> than the old?
Nope. I can post the "-S" output if you like. But the EGCS vs. GCC
versions are quite different. There were many changes to the back end
b
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Annelise Anderson wrote:
> I'm getting the following error with today's -current sources;
> this particular system has a rather strange history, so it may
> not be the sources, but something else. I have tried -DNOCRYPT,
> which doesn't help. And I've searched the archives
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 13, 1999 at 04:23:42PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > Do you have any idea why the new compiler is generating so much more code
> > than the old?
>
> Nope. I can post the "-S" output if you like. But the EGCS vs. GCC
> versions are quit
On Nov 13, Jim King wrote:
> At 01:05 PM 11/13/1999 -0800, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> >What does pnpinfo show?
>
> pnpinfo shows a bunch of information about my USR PnP modem, but nothing at
> all about the AWE64 (or anything else).
>
Sorry to jump in. I once difficulties with PnP that felt
This is just a "heads up" message, that the switch from EGCS 1.1.2 to
GCC 2.95.2 will probably occur this weekend. I can now `make world' and
build a GENERIC kernel fine with GCC 2.95.2.
All I have left to do is clean up some stuff and arrange some stuff.
--
-- David([EMAIL PROTECTED])
I missed something, I think.
# gcc --version
egcs-2.91.66
What is the relationship?
tomdean
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
At 10:23 PM 11/13/1999 -0500, Mathew Kanner wrote:
>On Nov 13, Jim King wrote:
> > At 01:05 PM 11/13/1999 -0800, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> > >What does pnpinfo show?
> >
> > pnpinfo shows a bunch of information about my USR PnP modem, but
> nothing at
> > all about the AWE64 (or anything else).
> >
>
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> BTW: I also don't need inline images, but I find xemacs more appealing
> in an X env.
Funny ... I only find xemacs useful when *not* using X, because that's
where xemacs will do syntax coloring and emacs won't.
Followups redirected to -chat.
--
B
David O'Brien wrote:
>
> Once again, `boot2' is the only thing holding us back from upgrading our
> base compiler. The commit below plus -fdata-sections gets us to needing
> to reduce another 100 bytes from `boot2'.
>
> This is an appeal to hackers to squeeze another 100 bytes out. It would
>
On Sun, Nov 14, 1999 at 04:48:33PM +0900, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> I'd rather find out _why_ the new compiler generates a bigger
> object.
Be my guest, but I don't have time for it. Gcc 2.95.2 has as many
backend changes as we have kernel changes from 3.x to 4.0. Thus it is no
surprise that th
30 matches
Mail list logo
