On 2/18/07, DAK GHATIKACHALAM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Freebsd
I have an issue with new card I need to make it work with freebsd,
on /var/log/messages I get
Feb 18 20:51:55 DAK kernel: pccard0: (manufacturer=0x0192,
produc
t=0x0710, function_type=6) at function 0
Feb 18 20:51:55 DAK
On Wednesday 21 February 2007 15:03, nocturnal wrote:
> Hi
>
> Well that's weird, is MAC defined by default at all? I tried searching
> for the definition but couldn't find it.
>
> I never thought it would be this hard just to get the ethernet address
> from an ethernet interface in FreeBSD. I thin
On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 10:17:21AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> Paolo Pisati wrote:
>
> > So, if none as anything against it, i'm going to commit this work on
> > Friday 23 around 14:00 UTC, so speak now or forever hold your peace.
>
> With any kind of luck this is redundant information for you, b
Hi
Well that's weird, is MAC defined by default at all? I tried searching
for the definition but couldn't find it.
I never thought it would be this hard just to get the ethernet address
from an ethernet interface in FreeBSD. I think i'll take a look at the
netlib source next, something tells
Hi list, as far as I know Intel 64 architecture (formerly known as Intel
Extended Memory 64 Technology, or Intel EM64T) enables 64-bit computing on
desktop when combined with supporting software. If I am right, 64-bit
computing (on Intel architecture) requires a computer system with a
processor
Alexander Leidinger a écrit :
Quoting Lockless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (from Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:30:19
+0100):
We (Lucas H. and Alexandre C.) are two young students
from France. We have a quite good theoretical knowledge of C
programing, but we would like to improve our experience in real
projec
--- Eric Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't know, but this seems to be a VM related
> issue (not issue as in
> bug). I think you've probably allocated pretty much
> all your memory to
> user-space stuff, and not left enough for the system
> to function. If
> you're on i386, and h
I've got zombie jails on a freebsd 6.x box (currently 6.2).
There are no processes running under any of them, but they still appear
on the jail list:
server# jls
JID IP Address Hostname Path
2 xxx.xxx.1.234host1.domain /data/jails/host1
1 xxx
Quoting Lockless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (from Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:30:19 +0100):
We (Lucas H. and Alexandre C.) are two young students
from France. We have a quite good theoretical knowledge of C
programing, but we would like to improve our experience in real
projects. So we looked at the Projects
--- Eric Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > after this attempt, swapinfo still shows zero swap
> in use.
> >
> > What does this mean ?
> >
> > Is my system now in an unstable state ? Should I
> reboot ?
>
> Did you try reducing your maxdsiz to something a few
> hundred mb's less?
No -
On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 09:00:35PM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
> >
> > Sockets (stuck in a state which can not be released immediately?) or
> > other resources? I really think that this is a bug, though.
>
> It was discussed millon times already and there is at least one open
> PR:
>
> http://
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, 01:21+0800, LI Xin wrote:
> Josef Karthauser wrote:
> > I've got zombie jails on a freebsd 6.x box (currently 6.2).
> > There are no processes running under any of them, but they still appear
> > on the jail list:
> >
> > server# jls
> >JID IP Address Hostname
Josef Karthauser wrote:
> I've got zombie jails on a freebsd 6.x box (currently 6.2).
> There are no processes running under any of them, but they still appear
> on the jail list:
>
> server# jls
>JID IP Address Hostname Path
> 2 xxx.xxx.1.234host1.domain
>
> A couple of things.
>
> - The newer rt2661.c driver has not been MFC'd to 6.2. That is most
> likely why your card is not working.
> - 'ifconfig' when run as root will load the module for a network
> driver provided it is a) in the path and b) name if_ name>.ko
>
>-Kip
>
On 02/20/07 11:44, Arone Silimantia wrote:
--- Eric Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
after this attempt, swapinfo still shows zero swap
in use.
What does this mean ?
Is my system now in an unstable state ? Should I
reboot ?
Did you try reducing your maxdsiz to something a few
hundred
Peter Jeremy wrote:
> I've found that you do get a worthwhile improvement in dump|restore
> performance by introducing a large (10's of MB) fifo between them.
> This helps reduce synchronisation between dump and restore (so that
> dump can continue to read whilst restore is busy writing a batch
16 matches
Mail list logo
