Re: Suggestion: usbd.conf uses rc.conf for options

2002-10-28 Thread Dominic Mitchell
Baldur Gislason wrote: I agree, that would be a nice feature in usbd, but a workaround to gain the same functionality would be: attach /usr/sbin/moused `/usr/bin/perl -e 'while() { $foo = $_ . $foo; } if($foo =~ /^moused_flags=(.*?)$/im) { print $1; }' /etc/rc.conf` -p /dev/${DEVNAME} -I

Re: Suggestion: usbd.conf uses rc.conf for options

2002-10-28 Thread Peter Pentchev
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 11:49:22AM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote: Baldur Gislason wrote: I agree, that would be a nice feature in usbd, but a workaround to gain the same functionality would be: attach /usr/sbin/moused `/usr/bin/perl -e 'while() { $foo = $_ . $foo; } if($foo =~

Re: Suggestion: usbd.conf uses rc.conf for options

2002-10-28 Thread Neil Blakey-Milner
On Mon 2002-10-28 (13:57), Peter Pentchev wrote: This had better be . /etc/defaults/rc.conf; source_rc_confs; ... :) I have been thinking for quite some time of writing a little utility that parses various configuration file mechanisms and allows the administrator to specify which config

Re: Suggestion: usbd.conf uses rc.conf for options

2002-10-28 Thread Alan B. Clegg
Unless the network is lying to me again, Robert Withrow said: I notice that usbd.conf has this for the mouse device: [..] I have a laptop that uses different moused_flags depending on the mouse being built-in or USB. I hate to say it, but perhaps introducing

Re: Increasing KVM

2002-10-28 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
Ian Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How exactly would I go about increasing KVM? Read the FAQ. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message

Re: New kevent types: NOTE_STARTEXEC and NOTE_STOPEXEC

2002-10-28 Thread Adrian Filipi-Martin
On Sun, 27 Oct 2002, Juli Mallett wrote: * De: Maxim Sobolev [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2002-10-27 ] [ Subjecte: Re: New kevent types: NOTE_STARTEXEC and NOTE_STOPEXEC ] On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 06:09:31PM -0700, Nate Lawson wrote: On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Maxim Sobolev wrote: Please

Re: Getting ACPI to work on -stable

2002-10-28 Thread Aurlien Nephtali
Hi, I've got a panic too while playing with the battery (when I insert it, some time later *BOOM* panic). It seems to be the same as Wilko so I don't attach the traceback (but if you really want it, I'll do :p). Someone is already investigating on this problem ? -- Aurélien

Ñåìèíàðû â íîÿáðå

2002-10-28 Thread russiaseminar
Ìåæäóíàðîäíûé èíôîðìàöèîííûé êîíñàëòèíãîâûé Öåíòð  Ïðèãëàøàåò ðóêîâîäèòåëåé ïðåäïðèÿòèé, ôèíàíñîâûõ äèðåêòîðîâ, ðóêîâîäèòåëåé ïëàíîâî-ýêîíîìè÷åñêèõ ñëóæá, ñïåöèàëèñòîâ ïî óïðàâëåíèþ ôèíàíñàìè, à òàêæå ÷àñòíûõ ëèö ïðèíÿòü ó÷àñòèå ñåìèíàðàõ-ïðàêòèêóìàõ, ïðîâîäèìûõ â íîÿáðå

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Kenneth Culver
You might want to give that a bit of thought. IBM, while producing OK scsi disks, has had a really terrible headache getting reliability into their IDE products. Additionally, IBM just sold their entire hard disk product line to some other company. I don't know if that had anything to do

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Kenneth Culver
I'd probably steer clear of the western digital drives as well. Yes the make that stear clear. 8MB cache that some of them have DOES make a difference, but from personal experience, the drives themselves don't last that long. So in short, what good is a fast hard-drive if it's just going to

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Daniel O'Connor
On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 01:42, Kenneth Culver wrote: I'd probably steer clear of the western digital drives as well. Yes the 8MB cache that some of them have DOES make a difference, but from personal experience, the drives themselves don't last that long. So in short, what good is a fast

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Kenneth Culver
I haven't had any trouble with the WDxxxBB drives - the WDxxxAA drives are pretty unreliable though. Hrmm, I havn't tried those, but just about every WD drive I've used has ended up with problems which were of course handled by the warranty, but even then, I still had to reinstall the os and

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Daniel O'Connor
On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 01:54, Kenneth Culver wrote: I haven't had any trouble with the WDxxxBB drives - the WDxxxAA drives are pretty unreliable though. Hrmm, I havn't tried those, but just about every WD drive I've used has ended up with problems which were of course handled by the

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Doug Barton
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Kenneth Culver wrote: I'd probably steer clear of the western digital drives as well. Yes the make that stear clear. Ummm... why? steer is a word with multiple meanings. I can't find stear anywhere. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Kenneth Culver
Yes, but my point is that the AA drives are bad, but the BB drives seem good. I have been using them for a while (~1 year) without trouble. I believe the JB drives are much more closely related to the BB drives (ie effectively identical but with a bigger cache). Personally I find that no HD

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Kenneth Culver
Ummm... why? steer is a word with multiple meanings. I can't find stear anywhere. well, lets just say that my brain is fried b/c of midterms. OK? :-P Ken To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Doug Barton
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Kenneth Culver wrote: Ummm... why? steer is a word with multiple meanings. I can't find stear anywhere. well, lets just say that my brain is fried b/c of midterms. OK? :-P Ah, you are forgiven then... go and sin no more. :) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread .
Howdy Crew, I am about to buy a new hard disk for my FreeBSD work station. Since FreeBSD's ATA drivers implement Tagged Command Queuing and IBM make the only ATA disks that implement tagged command queuing ( ie since the 60GXP family ), an IBM 40GB 120GXP looks like the best solution.

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Chuck Robey
On 29 Oct 2002, Daniel O'Connor wrote: On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 01:54, Kenneth Culver wrote: I haven't had any trouble with the WDxxxBB drives - the WDxxxAA drives are pretty unreliable though. Hrmm, I havn't tried those, but just about every WD drive I've used has ended up with

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Daniel O'Connor
On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 02:40, Chuck Robey wrote: Personally I find that no HD manufacturer has a good reputation - they have all made trashy drives at one point. Give the general time it takes for problems to surface vs product lifetimes makes deciding what to buy a PITA :( No, I'd take

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Peter Wemm
Daniel O'Connor wrote: On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 02:40, Chuck Robey wrote: Personally I find that no HD manufacturer has a good reputation - they have all made trashy drives at one point. Give the general time it takes for problems to surface vs product lifetimes makes deciding what to buy

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread .
Daniel O'Connor wrote: As you can imagine, this violates the basic assumptions of FFS and softdep. They assume that only sectors that are written to are at risk, and do all their ordering based on that assumption. But the assumption is completely bogus. Even with no-caching it doesn't work

Re: [hardware] Tagged Command Queuing or Larger Cache ?

2002-10-28 Thread Peter Wemm
.@babolo.ru wrote: Daniel O'Connor wrote: As you can imagine, this violates the basic assumptions of FFS and softdep. They assume that only sectors that are written to are at risk, and do all their ordering based on that assumption. But the assumption is completely bogus. Even with