"Dave J. Boers" wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I just wanted to let you know that I enabled UDMA66 (by plugging in an 80
> conductor cable) on my WDC AC418000D today. The mainboard is an ABit BP6
> with builtin Highpoint HPT366 ATA controller.
>
> The system works very nicely. I did some heavy testing
On Fri, 17 Dec 1999, Doug White wrote:
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 20:45:40 -0800 (PST)
> From: Doug White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Atrens, Andrew (A.B.) [EXCHANGE:SKY:1U33]"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: framemaker for linux
>
> On Thu, 16 Dec 1999, Andrew Atre
On Fri, 17 Dec 1999, Pascal Hofstee wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Dec 1999, Bruce Evans wrote:
>
> > 0301 is an old (bad) way of spelling
> > MASK_80387 | MASK_IEEE_FP | MASK_FLOAT_RETURNS. Cygnus finally fixed it in
> > in gcc/config/i386/freebsd.h on 1999/03/23 (see the ChangeLog), but FreeBSD
> > hasn
On Thu, 16 Dec 1999, Andrew Atrens wrote:
>
> All,
>
> This might be a linux ABI question, or it might be an `ld.so' question,
> so arguably I could have sent this to emulation, questions or since I run
> -current, current, or perhaps hackers, at any rate here goes -
>
>
> I've got `framemake
Here is a question that will test your memories!
I'm trying to use a Sun ELC (sun4c) as an Xterminal on my FreeBSD
system using Xkernel 2.0. I've used the old howto's from 1996
(Philippe Regnauld) as well as NetBSD diskless howto's to set this up.
I've got it working up to a point:
It finds i
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 02:08:50PM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
> The problem is that gcc 2.95.2 in -current does not include #define
The problem is that /usr/libexec/cpp ...
> __FreeBSD__ any more. XF can't tell the OS, so it assumes you lack
A fix is on the way RSN.
--
-- David([EMAIL PROT
On 18-Dec-99 Dave J. Boers wrote:
> The system works very nicely. I did some heavy testing in single user mode
> by moving several 300 Mb files around between the IDE disk and my other
> SCSI disk (which got me a sustained transfer rate of over 10 Mb/sec). Then
> I made world. Everything works gre
Hi all,
I just wanted to let you know that I enabled UDMA66 (by plugging in an 80
conductor cable) on my WDC AC418000D today. The mainboard is an ABit BP6
with builtin Highpoint HPT366 ATA controller.
The system works very nicely. I did some heavy testing in single user mode
by moving several
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 11:18:18AM -0800, Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Try this patch to -current, it should solve the problem. I've been
> meaning to fixup the buf_daemon for a while. This solves the
> buf_daemon problem. We still will not be entirely optimal due
On Sat, Nov 27, 1999 at 11:40:08AM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Nov 1999, Mark Murray wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > "make world" is broken in libc_r. Simple fix is to replace all
> > "socklen_t" with "int".
>
> libc_r likes to pull data from /usr/include instead of the
> source tree,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I see a few days ago that some one mentioned the 3COM 574BT 10/100 PCMICA card
> was still not supported.
> Is this true ???
Yes, it's still broken in -current. (I have one, I know.) Matt Dodd has the
specs and the NIC (complements of Terry Murphy at 3Com), so it shou
I see a few days ago that some one mentioned the 3COM 574BT 10/100 PCMICA card
was still not supported.
Is this true ???
Jerry T. Kendall, CISSP Celestica International Inc.
Manager, Worldw
>Hi,
>The latest XFree86 snapshot, 3.9.16f (which is about to become
>the public 3.9.17 snapshot) does not build on FreeBSD -current.
>
>It compains about fcvt, ecvt and gcvt.
>The exact error log from building XFree86 3.9.16f follows.
>
>It compiles ok on my 3.4 box (just CVSuped)
>
The problem
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 02:28:29PM +0100, Soren Schmidt wrote:
> Because the wd driver has a 10 secs timeout, and ata has 5 secs.
> I think the easiest way to "solve" this is to increase the
> timeout to 10-15 secs, as little as I want to do that...
I don't really understand disk drivers, so if
:Another thing I've found with the MegaRAID (or maybe this is an nfs
:thing?) is that large scale (100Mb, full duplex) hits on the NFS
:server tend to lock up the nfs server (which has the megaraid in it).
:Typically, this includes not being able to access the non-raid root
:var and usr partition
Another thing I've found with the MegaRAID (or maybe this is an nfs
thing?) is that large scale (100Mb, full duplex) hits on the NFS
server tend to lock up the nfs server (which has the megaraid in it).
Typically, this includes not being able to access the non-raid root
var and usr partitions.
An
> Mike> The Mylex controllers seem to have a small edge in performance,
> Mike> which may be due to them doing cache-line-sized I/Os (usually
> Mike> only 8k) in that case.
>
> Maybe so, but they also don't seem to support the LVD-enabled versions
> of the Mylex cards.
Who is "they" here? We c
Try this: running an old/working kernel, run disklabel on all your
disks/slices and make sure the "badsect" flag is NOT set.
I ran into this a couple of nights ago, updating a machine (my laptop) to a
current "-current".
--
T.T.F.N.,
Dave Truesdell / [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] / UNIX
> "Mike" == Mike Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Mike> Try enabling DirectIO and WriteBack if you haven't already.
Mike> AMI's RAID5 implementation seems to suffer from rewriting the
Mike> entire stripe when you do sub-stripe-sized writes, but I'm not
Mike> sure about that yet.
Already don
>
> :< said:
> :
> :> the IP and UDP checksum guessing, but more that I think you'll find that
> :> a considerable amount of the inbound NFS traffic handling is actually
> :> performed in the interrupt context
> :
> :If it is, then there is a serious bug.
>
> No serious NFS traffic handlin
> > "Mike" == Mike Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> The AMI MegaRAID 1400 delivers between 16.5 and 19 M/s (the 19M/s
> >> value is somewhat contrived --- using 8 bonnies in parrallel and
> >> then summing their results --- which is not 100% valid)... but the
> >> MegaRAID appears to
:The source filesystems were both standard with bsize 8192 and fsize
:1024. Target filesystems were nonstandard.
:
:I umounted the source filesystem, in the exact case /usr (/dev/ad0s1e),
:then mounted target filesystem to /mnt, cd to /mnt and
:
:dump -0a -f - /dev/ad0s1e | restore rf -
:--
:
:Va
It seems Thomas Veldhouse wrote:
>> Hmm, the WDC WD200BA disk does UDMA66 doesn't it ??
>> The VIA 82C686 has support for this, but its very "generous" in setting
>> it. Form the above I'd guess you dont have a 80lead cable on those
>> disks ?? What does the BIOS say about the disk modes on boot
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 08:48:30AM -0800, "Rodney W. Grimes"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A few more details please. Are you having problems when you are
> dumping from a file system formatted as above, or is it a restore
> going to this type of file system, or are both the source and destinati
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alexander Langer writes:
: BTW: The MAKEDEV _really_ does include 116 as major num. If this an error - could
:one _please_ correct this?
No. MAKEDEV is right.
BTW, what does your /etc/fstab look like?
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wit
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 11:18:05AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alexander Langer writes:
> : That are the ones I used. Are these the right ones?
> Turns out those are the right ones.
> : If so, why does it fail for me (incorrect major number) but not for you?
> Don't
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alexander Langer writes:
: That are the ones I used. Are these the right ones?
Turns out those are the right ones.
: If so, why does it fail for me (incorrect major number) but not for you?
Don't know.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 10:53:01AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alexander Langer writes:
> : crw-r- 1 root operator 116, 0x00010002 Dec 17 18:56 /dev/ad0
> You didn't copy MAKEDEV from a current source tree before making these
> devices. The major number of ad
Hi,
The latest XFree86 snapshot, 3.9.16f (which is about to become
the public 3.9.17 snapshot) does not build on FreeBSD -current.
It compains about fcvt, ecvt and gcvt.
The exact error log from building XFree86 3.9.16f follows.
It compiles ok on my 3.4 box (just CVSuped)
The next public snaps
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Warner Losh writes:
: You didn't copy MAKEDEV from a current source tree before making these
: devices. The major number of ad is 30, not 116.
Actually, this is wrong. I didn't update MY MAKEDEV before looking.
30 is the old major bdev number...
Warner
To Unsub
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alexander Langer writes:
: crw-r- 1 root operator 116, 0x00010002 Dec 17 18:56 /dev/ad0
You didn't copy MAKEDEV from a current source tree before making these
devices. The major number of ad is 30, not 116.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTE
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 10:24:19AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
> That looks good. Can you send the config file and the boot messages,
> at least those related to ata/ad? And a ls -l /dev/ad0* might not
> hurt either.
Unfortunately, I cant send the boot-messages, because they aren`t logged and I h
:> suggesting following flags for filesystem creation for newer, bigger
:> disks:
:>
:> newfs -b16384 -f2048 -u2048 -c128 -i4096
:>
:> I've used them since with no problems whatsoever. Now I got the dump
:> done on the machine with default filesystem, the bugger is unusual
:> filesystem I guess
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alexander Langer writes:
: ad0s1a
: an IDE drive with the new ata-drivers.
: Also, the same for wd0s1a and rwd0s1a
That looks good. Can you send the config file and the boot messages,
at least those related to ata/ad? And a ls -l /dev/ad0* might not
hurt either.
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 10:17:33AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
> : When I boot my new kernel, I get
> : root mount failure: 6
> This is ENXIO, Device Not Configured. What is the name of the device
> that it is trying to mount?
ad0s1a
an IDE drive with the new ata-drivers.
Also, the same for wd0s1
Kenneth D. Merry writes:
>
>
> Another advantage with gigabit ethernet is that if you can do jumbo frames,
> you can fit an entire 8K NFS packet in one frame.
>
> I'd like to see NFS numbers from two 21264 Alphas with GigE cards, zero
> copy, checksum offloading and a big striped array
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alexander Langer writes:
: When I boot my new kernel, I get
: root mount failure: 6
This is ENXIO, Device Not Configured. What is the name of the device
that it is trying to mount?
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-
Hello!
today I upgraded my current with the new ata drivers.
I followed the instructions in src/UPDATING.
When I boot my new kernel, I get
root mount failure: 6
Also, it automatically tries to mount wd0s1a, but this fails, too.
When I boot an old kernel, I can mount rwd0s1a
I shall give it th
:< said:
:
:> the IP and UDP checksum guessing, but more that I think you'll find that
:> a considerable amount of the inbound NFS traffic handling is actually
:> performed in the interrupt context
:
:If it is, then there is a serious bug.
:
:-GAWollman
:
:--
:Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We
> "Brad" == Brad Knowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Brad> At 10:02 AM -0500 1999/12/17, David Gilbert wrote:
>> Well... it's RAID-5 across the same 8 drives with all 8 drives on
>> one LVD chain (same configuration as the other test). I have tried
>> the 128k stripe, but it was slower than
> On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 10:47:59AM +0200, Vallo Kallaste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > It's very annoying, I have only fair experiences with dump/restore back
> > to the 2.2.2 days until now.
>
> Sorry for the long post and partially? false alert.
>
> Something in my mind wak
At 10:02 AM -0500 1999/12/17, David Gilbert wrote:
> Well... it's RAID-5 across the same 8 drives with all 8 drives on one
> LVD chain (same configuration as the other test). I have tried the
> 128k stripe, but it was slower than the default 64k stripe.
One of the lessons I learned f
...
> (200-300 MHz) clients. That's *with* packet loss (for some reason when
> my fxp ethernets pump data out that quickly they tend to cause packet
> loss in other parts of my HUBed network, which I find quite annoying).
Interesting you should say that I've been playing with so
< said:
> the IP and UDP checksum guessing, but more that I think you'll find that
> a considerable amount of the inbound NFS traffic handling is actually
> performed in the interrupt context
If it is, then there is a serious bug.
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all fami
On 17 Dec, Fritz Heinrichmeyer wrote:
> drive z: file="/dev/afd0s4" partition=4 # this works
>
> and now it works!
Confirmed, mtools works (mount remains).
I think this gives Søren a start to look at.
If I remember correctly one of the first versions of ata didn´t had this
problem (it stop
On Sat, 18 Dec 1999, Bruce Evans wrote:
> 0301 is an old (bad) way of spelling
> MASK_80387 | MASK_IEEE_FP | MASK_FLOAT_RETURNS. Cygnus finally fixed it in
> in gcc/config/i386/freebsd.h on 1999/03/23 (see the ChangeLog), but FreeBSD
> hasn't merged the change.
Thanks ... I do have on eother qu
On 17 Dec, Soren Schmidt wrote:
>> Of course i wish you a nice weekend ... but only mtools work.
>>
>> Mount_msdos still fails:
>>
>> mount_msdos /dev/afd0s4 /mnt
>> mount_msdos: /dev/afd0s4: Invalid argument
>
> Hmm, strange, are you sure the dospartition is on slice 4 ??
Yes (mounting /dev
On Fri, 17 Dec 1999, Pascal Hofstee wrote:
> freebsd-aout.h:
> #define TARGET_DEFAULT \
> (MASK_80387 | MASK_IEEE_FP | MASK_FLOAT_RETURNS |
> MASK_NO_FANCY_MATH_387)
>
>
> freebsd.h:
> #define TARGET_DEFAULT (MASK_NO_FANCY_MATH_387 | 0301)
>
>
> apparently the defines for MASK_80387 | MAS
Hi,
There is are error in compilling of ata-all.c on a
non-PCI macine, so I think, in ata-all.c the
ata_find_dev() has to be moved into
#if NPCI > 0
...
#endif
Val
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place.
> "Mike" == Mike Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The AMI MegaRAID 1400 delivers between 16.5 and 19 M/s (the 19M/s
>> value is somewhat contrived --- using 8 bonnies in parrallel and
>> then summing their results --- which is not 100% valid)... but the
>> MegaRAID appears to be stable.
On Fri, 17 Dec 1999, Soren Schmidt wrote:
>
> Hmm, the WDC WD200BA disk does UDMA66 doesn't it ??
> The VIA 82C686 has support for this, but its very "generous" in setting
> it. Form the above I'd guess you dont have a 80lead cable on those
> disks ?? What does the BIOS say about the disk mode
Hi,
While tracing a bug with my Mozilla Tinderbox-builds continuously rasing
SIGFPE's I starting searching for the gcc-option -mieee-fp as
suggested by people from the Mozilla-team.
I couldn't find that option in the gcc-man-pages so I started searching
for it in the gcc source-tree. I eventuall
It seems Fritz Heinrichmeyer wrote:
>
> Of course i wish you a nice weekend ... but only mtools work.
>
> Mount_msdos still fails:
>
> mount_msdos /dev/afd0s4 /mnt
> mount_msdos: /dev/afd0s4: Invalid argument
Hmm, strange, are you sure the dospartition is on slice 4 ??
-Søren
To Unsubscrib
Of course i wish you a nice weekend ... but only mtools work.
Mount_msdos still fails:
mount_msdos /dev/afd0s4 /mnt
mount_msdos: /dev/afd0s4: Invalid argument
--
Fritz Heinrichmeyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
FernUniversitaet Hagen, LG ES, 58084 Hagen (Germany)
tel:+49 2331/987-1166 fax:987-35
It seems Fritz Heinrichmeyer wrote:
> today i tried again a windows formatted ZIP disk with mtools. First
> with a line in /usr/local/etc/mtools.conf
>
> drive z: file="/dev/afd0s4" <--- this does not work!!
>
> i had a message like
>
> init Z: sector size too big
> Cannot initi
today i tried again a windows formatted ZIP disk with mtools. First
with a line in /usr/local/etc/mtools.conf
drive z: file="/dev/afd0s4" <--- this does not work!!
i had a message like
init Z: sector size too big
Cannot initialize 'Z:'
this message i have never seen before, so
It seems Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
>
> > Yup, sounds like the problem some are seing, now I wonder why I
> > havn't seen it on any of the IBM disks I've access to, hmm...
> >
> > It apparantly can't be disabled, but I'll try to figure out if
> > I can detect when the drive is in this mode, or p
It seems Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> I seem to be having a problem with the my Western Digital Caviar 6.4GB
> UDMA33
>
> ad0: ATA-4 disk at ata0 as master
> ad0: 19092MB (39102336 sectors), 38792 cyls, 16 heads, 63 S/T, 512 B/S
> ad0: 16 secs/int, 1 depth queue, UDMA33
> ad1: ATA-4 disk at at
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 08:22:03AM +0100, Soren Schmidt wrote:
> Yup, sounds like the problem some are seing, now I wonder why I
> havn't seen it on any of the IBM disks I've access to, hmm...
>
> It apparantly can't be disabled, but I'll try to figure out if
> I can detect when the drive is in
I seem to be having a problem with the my Western Digital Caviar 6.4GB
UDMA33 (5400RPM?) Hard Drive. I get the following error:
ad0: ATA-4 disk at ata0 as master
ad0: 19092MB (39102336 sectors), 38792 cyls, 16 heads, 63 S/T, 512 B/S
ad0: 16 secs/int, 1 depth queue, UDMA33
ad1: ATA-4 disk at at
Thus spake Peter Jeremy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 jeremyp inplat 96509 Dec 17 08:08 minigzip
> % cc -O -o minigzip minigzip.c /usr/lib/libz.a
What about stripping?
root:/usr/src/usr.bin/minigzip $ ls -l minigzip
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root bin 96921 17 Dez 12:35 minigzip
root:/usr/src/us
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 03:40:20PM +0100, Martin Cracauer wrote:
> > You can also fool sh into running the *wrong* binary if if you have
> > two in showdowed paths:
>
> pdksh does not suffer from either this problem or the problem that
> started thi
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 04:30:16PM -0700, Darren Wiebe wrote:
> I just built the world from sources about 3-4 hours ago. It was all
> great.
Fwiw, I just got the same error on another system, cvsupped this morning.
--
Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/ "Reliability means never
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 10:47:59AM +0200, Vallo Kallaste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
[snip]
> It's very annoying, I have only fair experiences with dump/restore back
> to the 2.2.2 days until now.
Sorry for the long post and partially? false alert.
Something in my mind waked up and I checked w
On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> Here's a general update on this bug report to -current. It took all day
> but I was finally able to reproduce Andrew's bug.
>
> You guys are going to *love* this.
>
> NFS uses the kernel 'boottime' structure to generate its version i
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Soren Schmidt writes:
>It seems Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
>
>Yup, sounds like the problem some are seing, now I wonder why I
>havn't seen it on any of the IBM disks I've access to, hmm...
>
>It apparantly can't be disabled, but I'll try to figure out if
>I can dete
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chuck Rob
ey writes:
>> I'd also like to see us have enough information in /proc to be able to
>> divorce ps & friends from libkvm. It would be nice to be able to have
>> most tools continue to work if you have mismatched kernels &
>> userlands.
Such transparancy
>
> We've solved most of the performance issues, but NFS is still
> eating a little too much cpu for my tastes. Unfortunately it is getting to
> the point where a significant portion of the performance loss is occuring
> in the network driver itself. Some of my cards eat 25% of
Hello !
Something is weird with standard dump/restore procedure which I've
always used to relocate my filesystems. I'm using 4.0-19991208-CURRENT
on two machines, one is my home machine with SiS 5591 ATA controller and
the other one has Intel PIIX. Home machine has disk pair Seagate 6.4GB
and IBM
69 matches
Mail list logo
