On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 10:54:45PM -0500, Jeff Roberson wrote:
I have commited libthr. To try this out you'll need to do the following
I know very very little about threads, but I'm interested as to what the
purpose is of this library. Is there a document available somewhere that
describes the
On (2003/04/02 01:54), Jeff Roberson wrote:
It probably still needs some tweaking but it seems to be MUCH better now.
New algorithm entirely.
nice +20 processes will not run if anything else wants to.
Some of us have been waiting for that behaviour for a long time (long
before you started
Stijn Hoop wrote:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 10:54:45PM -0500, Jeff Roberson wrote:
I have commited libthr. To try this out you'll need to do the following
I know very very little about threads, but I'm interested as to what the
purpose is of this library. Is there a document available
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 03:24:59PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 06:03:48PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
Anyway, I've committed the fix to release/Makefile that strips
the .comment section out from the BOOTMFS kernel. If you
On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 23:28:01 -0800
Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The primary performance reasoning behind a 1:1 kernel threading
implementation, relative to the user space single kernel entry
scheduler in the libc_r implementation is SMP scalability for
threaded applications.
I
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On (2003/04/02 01:54), Jeff Roberson wrote:
It probably still needs some tweaking but it seems to be MUCH better now.
New algorithm entirely.
nice +20 processes will not run if anything else wants to.
Some of us have been waiting for that
On (2003/04/02 21:48), Bruce Evans wrote:
Some of us have been waiting for that behaviour for a long time (long
before you started working on ULE).
Er, this is the normal behaviour in FreeBSD-3.0 through FreeBSD-4.8,
so you shouldn't have waited more than negative 4 years for it :-).
The
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 03:24:59PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 06:03:48PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
Anyway, I've committed the fix to release/Makefile that strips
the
Hello Maksim,
[...]
actually, i have added support for firmware download in ng_ubt(4)
driver and ported Broadcom firmware download utility from Linux.
this will be included into the next snapshot which will be realeased
in a few days.
It's good news. I'll try it.
[...]
Could not execute
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On (2003/04/02 21:48), Bruce Evans wrote:
Some of us have been waiting for that behaviour for a long time (long
before you started working on ULE).
Er, this is the normal behaviour in FreeBSD-3.0 through FreeBSD-4.8,
so you shouldn't have
Hi,
I have made a few modifications to the ubsec driver, in order to
recognize and configure the Sun Crypto Accelerator 1000 PCI card. The
card uses a Broadcom 5821 chip, so the modifications were minimal, but I
still don't get very verbose info using pciconf -lv:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:18:0:
Hello,
I'd be glad if you revert the change in rev 1.23 of sys/netinet/ip.h
unless there's some special reason you can't undo your rfc3514
implementation.
Thanks.
(Yes, I regret not having been subscribed to cvs-all list...:)
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I hope that core will approve removing sendmail from FreeBSD-CURRENT.
Thank you,
Pete...
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alexander Leidinger wrote:
On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 23:28:01 -0800
Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The primary performance reasoning behind a 1:1 kernel threading
implementation, relative to the user space single kernel entry
scheduler in the libc_r implementation is SMP scalability for
Peter Schultz wrote:
Hi,
I hope that core will approve removing sendmail from FreeBSD-CURRENT.
I'm pretty sure they will, just as soon as someone provides
patches to make installed base system components like sendmail
into preinstalled packages, and then steps up and makes some
other MTA and
While I'm all for a sense of humor, and agree that implementation of
the IP_EVIL flag is vital for FreeBSD to be a modern operating system,
it stops being funny when it breaks world.
...
=== sbin/ping
cc -O -pipe -march=pentiumpro -DIPSEC -Wsystem-headers -Werror -Wall -Wno-format-y2k
On (2003/04/02 06:05), Terry Lambert wrote:
I think Jeff (or someone else?) said, that some web browsers gain
something too (serialization issues with libc_r)? I had the impression
that this also applies to UP systems.
Do I misremember this? If not, does it not apply to UP systems as
On (2003/04/02 09:20), Michael W . Lucas wrote:
While I'm all for a sense of humor, and agree that implementation of
the IP_EVIL flag is vital for FreeBSD to be a modern operating system,
it stops being funny when it breaks world.
You sure you didn't get caught in the middle of a cvsup mirror
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On (2003/04/02 06:05), Terry Lambert wrote:
I think Jeff (or someone else?) said, that some web browsers gain
something too (serialization issues with libc_r)? I had the impression
that this also applies to UP systems.
Do I misremember
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 04:30:55PM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On (2003/04/02 09:20), Michael W . Lucas wrote:
While I'm all for a sense of humor, and agree that implementation of
the IP_EVIL flag is vital for FreeBSD to be a modern operating system,
it stops being funny when it breaks
Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On (2003/04/02 06:05), Terry Lambert wrote:
Do I misremember this? If not, does it not apply to UP systems as well?
FWIW: the libc_r reentrancy isn't fixed by a 1:1 model for
anything but calls for which there are no non-blocking
alternative kernel APIs. [...long
On (2003/04/02 09:43), Michael W . Lucas wrote:
You sure you didn't get caught in the middle of a cvsup mirror sync? I
have an IP_EVIL world and kernel running fine here.
According to some folks on IRC, it was renamed to IP_EF in
src/sys/netinet/ip.h, but not renamed in ping.c.
I just
On 16:51+0200, Apr 2, 2003, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On (2003/04/02 09:43), Michael W . Lucas wrote:
You sure you didn't get caught in the middle of a cvsup mirror sync? I
have an IP_EVIL world and kernel running fine here.
According to some folks on IRC, it was renamed to IP_EF in
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 06:53:22PM +0400, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
On 16:51+0200, Apr 2, 2003, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On (2003/04/02 09:43), Michael W . Lucas wrote:
You sure you didn't get caught in the middle of a cvsup mirror sync? I
have an IP_EVIL world and kernel running fine
Terry Lambert wrote:
Peter Schultz wrote:
Hi,
I hope that core will approve removing sendmail from FreeBSD-CURRENT.
I'm pretty sure they will, just as soon as someone provides
patches to make installed base system components like sendmail
into preinstalled packages, and then steps up and makes
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Schultz writes:
I'm sorry for beating a dead horse.
This is the best summary so far on this subject.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Peter Schultz wrote:
Why not just have these logged by default instead? Like /var/log/daily,
and whatnot. Anyone with half a care about this stuff can easily make
their own modifications, those who don't care will never know the
difference.
Because syslog is unreliable. See BUGS section of
Robert Watson wrote:
You should notice marked interactivity and UI latency improvements with
threaded GUI apps over libc_r because GUI threads will generally no longer
be blocked when disk I/O and blocking I/O occurs. For example,
applications like Open Office, Netscape, et al, really get a
On (2003/04/02 07:38), Terry Lambert wrote:
Is the disk I/O really that big of an issue? All writes will
be on underlying non-blocking descriptors; I guess you are
saying that the interleaved I/O is more important, further
down the system call interface than the top, and this becomes
an
Terry Lambert wrote:
Because syslog is unreliable. See BUGS section of the man page.
Don't you think that if syslog is unreliable, then it should be fixed ?
If things are as you say, we have 2 problems: Sendmail gettings CERTs
every other day and an unreliable system logger. Would you rather
On 02-Apr-2003 Peter Schultz wrote:
I'm sorry for beating a dead horse. A guy and I from tcbug were just
trying to fix his postfix installation, he does not know what happened,
it just stopped working. There would not have been a problem if
sendmail wasn't tied into the system so
Don't you think that if syslog is unreliable, then it should be fixed ?
If things are as you say, we have 2 problems: Sendmail gettings CERTs
every other day and an unreliable system logger. Would you rather just
let things be as they are ?
Absolutely not! Fix the problems and they would be
David Schultz wrote:
Thus spake Thanjee Neefam [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I was very happy when compiling my 5.0 kernel. For the first time device
midi compiled without giving any errors. This abnormal excitement only
led to misery when I discovered after rebooting that there still was no
MIDI.
Is MIDI
John Baldwin wrote:
On 02-Apr-2003 Peter Schultz wrote:
I'm sorry for beating a dead horse. A guy and I from tcbug were just
trying to fix his postfix installation, he does not know what happened,
it just stopped working. There would not have been a problem if
sendmail wasn't tied into the
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 07:38:14AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Has anyone tried compiling X11 to use libthr?
Someone reported success with KDE, so it should serve as a sign of working X11.
Jiawei
--
Without the userland, the kernel is useless.
--inspired by
From: Peter Schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
One interesting thing to note from that thread, is that Yuriy Tsibizov
is into the development of this stuff, but does not have all the
equipment needed to conduct testing. I don't know what hardware you
have, but this is what he's been working
Terry Lambert wrote:
If you look over the historical cases of this discussion,
you'll see that the answer always comes down to make the
system more modular, so people can replace XXX with YYY and
quit bothering us; please send patches. 8-) 8-).
Thanks for your help on this. I've been getting so
Sendmail has not been working on my system for some time now. I can't say
exactly how long, but my guess is that it broke when I upgraded to
RELENG_5_0. This is how sendmail is invoked (by default) and it's output.
# sendmail -L sm-mta -bd -q30m -ODaemonPortOptions=Addr=localhost
451 4.0.0 No
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
Is the disk I/O really that big of an issue? All writes will be on
underlying non-blocking descriptors; I guess you are saying that the
interleaved I/O is more important, further down the system call
interface than the top, and this becomes an issue?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jens Rehsack writes:
The problem I see with that is, that even a minimalistic base install
installs things like sendmail, ppp, atm-stuff, g77 and so on.
I really think splitting the base in some sub-parts would it make much
easier to do NO_SENDMAIL on my own. So I
evantd Sendmail has not been working on my system for some time now. I
evantd can't say exactly how long, but my guess is that it broke when I
evantd upgraded to RELENG_5_0. This is how sendmail is invoked (by
evantd default) and it's output.
evantd # sendmail -L sm-mta -bd -q30m
* De: Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-04-02 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: FreeBSD/alpha kern.flp flood ]
I'd hardly call it a bug, since style(9) explicitly says C files
should use __FBSDID().
Another bug. __FBSDID() is is not normally used in the kernel. E.g.,
rev.1.1 of almost
John Baldwin wrote:
On 02-Apr-2003 Peter Schultz wrote:
I'm sorry for beating a dead horse. A guy and I from tcbug were just
trying to fix his postfix installation, he does not know what happened,
it just stopped working. There would not have been a problem if
sendmail wasn't tied into the
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 01:44:39PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
Most of the savings from stripping commits is from removing verbose compiler
id GCC: (GNU) 3.2.1 [FreeBSD] 20021119 (release).
...
David, can we get rid of the .comment section for the normal
builds too, or at least not put
On Wed, 02 Apr 2003 10:59:25 -0600
Peter Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[x] sendmail ... (default)
[ ] postfix ...
[ ] exim ...
[ ] qmail ...
[ ] none (caution: desktop users only, insecure use of syslog)
AFAIK, sendmail, postfix and none are the options presented to the
user during the
Hurray! With the addition of a make install, that worked wonderfully. I have
no idea what was wrong with my sendmail.cf but at least now I can read the
output from periodic.
Thanks a lot,
Evan Dower
From: Gregory Neil Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Evan Dower [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL
You should notice marked interactivity and UI latency improvements with
threaded GUI apps over libc_r because GUI threads will generally no longer
be blocked when disk I/O and blocking I/O occurs. For example,
applications like Open Office, Netscape, et al, really get a lot better
with
evantd Sendmail has not been working on my system for some time now. I
evantd can't say exactly how long, but my guess is that it broke when I
evantd upgraded to RELENG_5_0. This is how sendmail is invoked (by
evantd default) and it's output.
evantd # sendmail -L sm-mta -bd -q30m
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peter Schultz writes:
: I hope that core will approve removing sendmail from FreeBSD-CURRENT.
Request denied.
1) you made no case for it: Everybdoy knows this is a contentious
issue, yet no reasons were given.
2) You cc'd core and a public mailing list. Don't
I was trying some network diagnostics yesterday and needed to generate a
continuous stream of small packets going across a few routers. So I
used ifconfig to set my MTU to some very low values (100, 300, 500, and
a few others). I know there's probably a better way to accomplish that,
but
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 06:01:01PM +0200, Jens Rehsack wrote:
The problem I see with that is, that even a minimalistic base install
installs things like sendmail, ppp, atm-stuff, g77 and so on.
I would love to see the toolchain broken out into its own tarball like
NetBSD. It isn't a simple
David O'Brien wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 06:01:01PM +0200, Jens Rehsack wrote:
The problem I see with that is, that even a minimalistic base install
installs things like sendmail, ppp, atm-stuff, g77 and so on.
I would love to see the toolchain broken out into its own tarball like
NetBSD.
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Michael W . Lucas wrote:
Thank you very much!
Sorry about the breakage.
--
| Matthew N. Dodd | '78 Datsun 280Z | '75 Volvo 164E | FreeBSD/NetBSD |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 2 x '84 Volvo 245DL| ix86,sparc,pmax |
| http://www.jurai.net/~winter | For Great
On 02-Apr-2003 Jens Rehsack wrote:
John Baldwin wrote:
On 02-Apr-2003 Peter Schultz wrote:
I'm sorry for beating a dead horse. A guy and I from tcbug were just
trying to fix his postfix installation, he does not know what happened,
it just stopped working. There would not have been a
On Wed Apr 02, 2003 at 02:29:30PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
I really think splitting the base in some sub-parts would it make much
easier to do NO_SENDMAIL on my own. So I had to remove each not required
file separately. That's no good solution.
[stepping back a bit ]
I find an
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], John Baldwin writes:
I find an odd situation here whenever this topic comes up. One the
one hand, people are always wanting to split the entire base system
up into small packages for each little piece of the base. On the
other hand, one of FreeBSD's selling points
I tried soliciting ports@ and questions@ for answers to these questions,
but no answers were volunteered which leads me to believe that these
issues may be specific to -current. I'm hoping someone can give me a
clue as to what the problem is or at least give me a pointer (have
searched
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Maybe this page could also contain an option to show the list of
files, and maybe even a backwards option to tell which options
are involved in a particular file or directorys existence.
So, to answer you question: I like it as it is where I
On Wed, 02 Apr 2003 14:29:30 -0500 (EST)
John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I find an odd situation here whenever this topic comes up. One the
one hand, people are always wanting to split the entire base system
up into small packages for each little piece of the base. On the
other hand,
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 02:29:30PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
...
[stepping back a bit ]
I find an odd situation here whenever this topic comes up. One the
one hand, people are always wanting to split the entire base system
up into small packages for each little piece of the base. On
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Dan Naumov wrote:
DNOn Wed, 02 Apr 2003 14:29:30 -0500 (EST)
DNJohn Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DN
DN I find an odd situation here whenever this topic comes up. One the
DN one hand, people are always wanting to split the entire base system
DN up into small packages for
I'm having a problem with -current on a ProLiant BL10e blade server. On
the blade server, we use a serial console on sio0/COM1. This works
perfectly with 4.8, but for some reason, the sio driver doesn't see COM1
at all, and assigns COM2 resources to sio0. Any pointers to where I
should look
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 21:56:40 +0200
Wilko Bulte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 02:29:30PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
I find an odd situation here whenever this topic comes up. One the
one hand, people are always wanting to split the entire base system
up into small
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
Robert Watson wrote:
You should notice marked interactivity and UI latency improvements with
threaded GUI apps over libc_r because GUI threads will generally no longer
be blocked when disk I/O and blocking I/O occurs. For example,
applications
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 11:28:53PM +0300, Dan Naumov wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 21:56:40 +0200
Wilko Bulte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 02:29:30PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
I find an odd situation here whenever this topic comes up. One the
one hand, people are
* De: Jeff Roberson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-04-02 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. ]
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
Also, any ETA on the per process signal mask handing bug in
libthr? Might not be safe to convert everything up front, in
a rush of eager
I was testing some changes to make fxp MPSAFE and got a LOR in allocating
the mbuf cluster and then finally a panic when trying to dereference the
cluster header. Is the mbuf system MPSAFE? Is it ok to call m_getcl
with a device lock held (but not Giant)?
The lock reversal was: 1. fxp softc
Dear Hackers,
[ for archive purposes ]
all the USB stack debug traces are available at
http://www.geocities.com/m_evmenkin/usb/
i also managed to get USB dumps from W2K that runs on the same laptop.
http://www.geocities.com/m_evmenkin/usb/USB_HUB.LOG
trace when W2K attach the second hub
Am Mi, 2003-04-02 um 22.28 schrieb Dan Naumov:
I think being able to update just about ANYTHING, except the kernel
without the need for a reboot is one of the best features of Linux and
actual advantages it has over FreeBSD.
I see no real barriers at updating utility or library of your choice
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:27:04AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peter Schultz writes:
: I hope that core will approve removing sendmail from FreeBSD-CURRENT.
Request denied.
1) you made no case for it: Everybdoy knows this is a contentious
issue, yet no
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Juli Mallett wrote:
* De: Jeff Roberson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-04-02 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. ]
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
Also, any ETA on the per process signal mask handing bug in
libthr? Might not be safe to convert
Unfortunately, I don't have too much information here. The scenario is as
follows:
cboss: NFS file/build server
crash2: NFS diskless client
I built world on cboss; I then did installworld in crash2. I intended to
installworld to a DESTDIR on a local disk on crash2, but I failed to mount
it
Terry Lambert wrote:
Jun Su wrote:
[ ... 1:1 kernel threads implementation ... ]
A benchmark would be interested.
This request doesn't make sense.
The primary performance reasoning behind a 1:1 kernel threading
implementation, relative to the user space single kernel entry
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:26:03AM -0700, Nate Williams wrote:
evantd Sendmail has not been working on my system for some time now. I
evantd can't say exactly how long, but my guess is that it broke when I
evantd upgraded to RELENG_5_0. This is how sendmail is invoked (by
evantd default)
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Jeff Roberson wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Juli Mallett wrote:
* De: Jeff Roberson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-04-02 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. ]
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
Also, any ETA on the per process signal mask handing
This commit (hopefully) improves the situation when a media is removed
quickly after it appeared. (A number of people have reported this with
USB devices).
There are still a couple of minor races.
Poul-Henning
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Poul-Henning Kamp
writes:
phk 2003/04/02
Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On (2003/04/02 07:38), Terry Lambert wrote:
Is the disk I/O really that big of an issue? All writes will
be on underlying non-blocking descriptors; I guess you are
saying that the interleaved I/O is more important, further
down the system call interface than the top,
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Juli Mallett wrote:
* De: Jeff Roberson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-04-02 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. ]
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
Also, any ETA on the per process signal mask handing bug in
libthr? Might not be safe to
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Jeff Roberson wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Juli Mallett wrote:
* De: Jeff Roberson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-04-02 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. ]
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
Also, any ETA on the per process signal mask handing
Dan Naumov wrote:
Terry Lambert wrote:
Because syslog is unreliable. See BUGS section of the man page.
Don't you think that if syslog is unreliable, then it should be fixed ?
Sure. You should definitely fix it; you'll need to figure out
a way to know whether we've run out of mbufs, or
On 02-Apr-2003 Dan Naumov wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 21:56:40 +0200
Wilko Bulte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 02:29:30PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
I find an odd situation here whenever this topic comes up. One the
one hand, people are always wanting to split the
Jens Rehsack wrote:
John Baldwin wrote:
First, core@ is not the appropriate body for that type of request.
Both current@ and arch@ are much better targets. Second, is
NO_SENDMAIL + the postfix port inadequate?
The problem I see with that is, that even a minimalistic base install
leafy wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 07:38:14AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Has anyone tried compiling X11 to use libthr?
Someone reported success with KDE, so it should serve as a sign of working X11.
Not X11 clients.
The X11 server.
-- Terry
* De: Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-04-02 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. ]
leafy wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 07:38:14AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Has anyone tried compiling X11 to use libthr?
Someone reported success with KDE, so it should serve
On 02-Apr-2003 Terry Lambert wrote:
leafy wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 07:38:14AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Has anyone tried compiling X11 to use libthr?
Someone reported success with KDE, so it should serve as a sign of working X11.
Not X11 clients.
The X11 server.
Gee, I
Terry Lambert wrote:
leafy wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 07:38:14AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Has anyone tried compiling X11 to use libthr?
Someone reported success with KDE, so it should serve as a sign of working X11.
Not X11 clients.
The X11 server.
-- Terry
Just thought I would report it:
lock order reversal
1st 0xc61f5940 pcm0 (sound softc) @ /local/usr.src/sys/dev/sound/pci/cmi.c:520
2nd 0xc6209e80 pcm0:play:0 (pcm channel) @
/local/usr.src/sys/dev/sound/pcm/channel.c:440
Stack backtrace:
backtrace(c04e759f,c6209e80,c61a9b54,c06a2127,c06a21a5)
Peter Schultz wrote:
Terry Lambert wrote:
If you look over the historical cases of this discussion,
you'll see that the answer always comes down to make the
system more modular, so people can replace XXX with YYY and
quit bothering us; please send patches. 8-) 8-).
Thanks for your
Note: This should have been posted to -questions, not -current.
Evan Dower wrote:
Sendmail has not been working on my system for some time now. I can't say
exactly how long, but my guess is that it broke when I upgraded to
RELENG_5_0. This is how sendmail is invoked (by default) and it's
Terry Lambert wrote:
Jens Rehsack wrote:
John Baldwin wrote:
First, core@ is not the appropriate body for that type of request.
Both current@ and arch@ are much better targets. Second, is
NO_SENDMAIL + the postfix port inadequate?
The problem I see with that is, that even a minimalistic base
On 2003-04-02 23:28, Dan Naumov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 21:56:40 +0200
Wilko Bulte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 02:29:30PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
I find an odd situation here whenever this topic comes up. One the
one hand, people are always wanting
evantd Sendmail has not been working on my system for some time now. I
evantd can't say exactly how long, but my guess is that it broke when I
evantd upgraded to RELENG_5_0. This is how sendmail is invoked (by
evantd default) and it's output.
evantd # sendmail -L sm-mta -bd
On 02-Apr-2003 Terry Lambert wrote:
Note: This should have been posted to -questions, not -current.
Please read the other replies before sending your own. His sendmail.cf
was empty and the problem was quickly diagnosed and fixed a while ago.
--
John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Juli Mallett wrote:
* De: Jeff Roberson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-04-02 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. ]
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
Also, any ETA on the per process signal mask
Nate Lawson writes:
I was testing some changes to make fxp MPSAFE and got a LOR in allocating
the mbuf cluster and then finally a panic when trying to dereference the
cluster header. Is the mbuf system MPSAFE? Is it ok to call m_getcl
with a device lock held (but not Giant)?
The
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Jeff Roberson wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Juli Mallett wrote:
* De: Jeff Roberson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-04-02 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. ]
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
Robert Watson wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
Is the disk I/O really that big of an issue? All writes will be on
underlying non-blocking descriptors; I guess you are saying that the
interleaved I/O is more important, further down the system call
interface than the top,
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Daniel Eischen wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Jeff Roberson wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Juli Mallett wrote:
* De: Jeff Roberson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-04-02 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: libthr and 1:1
On 02-Apr-2003 Terry Lambert wrote:
The only way I see for disk I/O to be involved in Mozilla is in
local cache? You can turn that off.
Umm, the idea here is to actually make threaded programs
_useful_. Not to require that you trim their functionality
down before we handle them in a sane
John Baldwin wrote:
On 02-Apr-2003 Terry Lambert wrote:
The only way I see for disk I/O to be involved in Mozilla is in
local cache? You can turn that off.
Umm, the idea here is to actually make threaded programs
_useful_. Not to require that you trim their functionality
down before
1 - 100 of 151 matches
Mail list logo
