At 07:25 AM 8/2/2007, Roberth Sjonøy wrote:
Hello, Ive just installed my prefered text
editor, nano, but when im going to run nano, this just appears:
/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Shared object
"libncursesw.so.6" not found , required by "nano"
I have nano 2.0.6 installed from packages (not ports) and
At 06:03 PM 7/20/2007, James Long wrote:
Is it normal for bzip2 to be significantly slower than gzip? If not,
where can I look for things that might be causing "bzip2 --fast" to
take 50-60 times longer to compress a (sendmail log) file than gzip?
In my experience, Yes -- It's dreadfully slow
At 07:14 PM 6/29/2007, you wrote:
So, is running portupgrade -a a good idea, as you likely haven't
checked for issues
for your system?
I just started using portupgrade recently, and no, I would NOT let it
rip with the --all option.
I find it's most useful for the libraries and required pack
At 11:43 AM 6/29/2007, zbigniew szalbot wrote:
As far as I remember, when installing FBSD I chose not to install
Linux binary compatibility (not sure if that matters though). But my
question is more general. Can Linux software be safely (and
securely) used on a unix platform? I am happy to use
At 07:03 PM 6/12/2007, Dixit, Viraj wrote:
My FreeBSD 5.3 system message logs are showing me this info,
Jun 12 14:53:48 gatekeeper kernel: pid 58059 (ftpd), uid 1049 inumber
141313 on /usr: filesystem full
/dev/da0s1f 7529054 7381944 -455214 107%/usr
Well, df shows /usr at 107% of capac
At 05:58 AM 6/7/2007, Albert Shih wrote:
I want to configure a FreeBSD box without sendmail-daemon but I want
all all mail sent to my smtp-server.
I usually disable sendmail completely, as you have done. Then
install ssmtp from the ports. It's simple, secure, and only needs
about 4 lines of
At 07:45 PM 6/6/2007, Sean Murphy wrote:
Is anyone running virtualization of FreeBSD servers on VMware or
other virtualization software? What experiences have you had, good or bad?
Been wanting to ask the same... I've heard of virt' software for
some time but didn't realize what it could rea
At 02:08 PM 6/3/2007, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
3) Both the MOBO and drive are SATA-300 rated, but 6.2 insists that
the drive is running at SATA-150. I have verified that the drive
has no jumper forcing it into this mode.
Don't know about the other issues, but I have a Dell with similar
Intel
At 07:01 AM 6/3/2007, you wrote:
I have just installed FreeBSD and found that the nic em0 is set to
half-duplex only. Could anyone tell me how I can switch it to full-duplex?
media: Ethernet autoselect (10baseT/UTP )
You should be more concerned that it is only at 10Mb. I'm not sure
At 11:59 AM 6/2/2007, Christopher Hilton wrote:
. All of these machines are older Pentium III 1GHz single or
dual CPU class machines. .. I'd like to go to Gig E to improve
performance for a hand full of clients on the local LAN and to move
critical data out of the DMZ. Eventually I plan
At 01:16 AM 6/2/2007, Christopher Hilton wrote:
.My experience with Gigabit Ethernet leads me to like the Intel
Pro/1000 cards which I believe use the em(4) driver in FreeBSD.
Go for it! I just upgraded several servers and desktops with Intel
1000 series NICs, and they're working great.
At 05:53 PM 5/30/2007, Alex R wrote:
> 6.2-what? You are probably running Release; you don't have Stable unless
> you've updated source and re-compiled everything. Stable is really a few
You're right.. And my fault for assuming Release/Stable meant the
same thing.. My bad..
S'ok... it's q
At 09:45 AM 5/25/2007, Lucien Werner wrote:
I am building a file server off freeBSD, and am wondering if my sata
raid controller is supported by the OS. I have the Addonics *4 Port
RAID 5 / JBOD SATA II PCI Controller (ADSA4R5) controller host. The
chipset is Silicon Image Sil 3124. If this
At 08:43 AM 5/25/2007, Dan Sikorsky wrote:
Having major issues with my ethernet card It seems like one out of
every 20 boots will get it working, whats the deal with these broadcoms
I have two Dell SC430s with integrated Broadcom gigabit (bge) and
they have worked fine with 6.0 thru 6.2 for ov
At 11:52 PM 5/22/2007, you wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> # portsnap fetch
> Latest snapshot on server is older than what we already have!
That's really strange. And it doesn't happen for me.
Is it possible that you have a misbehaving proxy which is caching
a month-old snapshot? Colin Perci
Hope this hasn't been asked 2^32 times; didn't see anything in the
recent archives.
What is up with the portsnap servers? I saw the announcement that
"ports was frozen for the new XOrg blah... blah...". Is that
still the case?
Try to fetch and it says:
# portsnap fetch
Looking up por
16 matches
Mail list logo
