Rene Ladan wrote:
On Sun, Aug 28, 2005 at 04:30:19PM +0400, Boris Samorodov wrote:
Hi!
As for 5.x notes about -O2 (libalias, gcc) were removed at revision
1.229.2.7 of /usr/src/share/examples/etc/make.conf. But for 6.0-BETA3
we do have these warnings. Should they be removed as for 5.x? Is it
C. Michailidis wrote:
This is a very straight-forward way of doing things. Do you really think that
sysinstall should use a similar method when it attempts to auto-configure a
slice?
From what I understand there are quite valid reasons why you would want a
seperate /, /var, /tmp, and /usr.
Jon Dama wrote:
yes, that's quite generous.
why isn't /tmp just an mfs mount though?
While I like that suggestion personally, some people get perturbed about files
in /tmp going away if the power fails or you reboot.
--
-Chuck
___
freebsd-stable@
On 平成 17/08/29, at 12:30, C. Michailidis wrote:
[...]
I understand that the automatically generated values by sysinstall
are the "dumbest" settings you can ask for... but auto-allocating a
maximum of 256mb for the root, var, and tmp filesystems (even if
you have an incredibly large slice
yes, that's quite generous.
why isn't /tmp just an mfs mount though?
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005, Colin Percival wrote:
> C. Michailidis wrote:
> > Remember, I'm talking about the 'path of least resistance', I understand
> > that
> > I could label the slice manually with any number of different
> > c
C. Michailidis wrote:
> Remember, I'm talking about the 'path of least resistance', I understand that
> I could label the slice manually with any number of different configurations.
> The issue I was hoping to shed some light on is... "Can the auto-configuration
> mechanism stand to be improved?".
On Sunday 28 August 2005 11:57 pm, you wrote:
> For anything over a 9gb disk, I just make one big / partition. If you
> sub partition, you'll always end up filling one (either /var or /tmp
> quickly or /usr eventually) and wish you had picked different sizes.
>
This is a very straight-forward w
On Sunday 28 August 2005 11:37 pm, you wrote:
> I don't really understand what you're so worked up about: if you don't
> like the defaults, don't use them.
Come on now, Dave. I know that you don't really mean this. You are not a
zombie, are you? After all, 'like' is an analog, subjective term
In the last episode (Aug 28), C. Michailidis said:
> Did you ever see a 300 lb. bodybuilder with legs like pencils? It's
> pretty funny. Now imagine a 199gb /usr with a 256mb /tmp /var and /,
> look similar? This issue became apparent when I attempted to
> portupgrade OpenOffice and the process
Gleaned from /usr/src/usr.sbin/sysinstall/label.c:
#define ROOT_DEFAULT_SIZE 256
#define USR_DEFAULT_SIZE3072
#define VAR_DEFAULT_SIZE256
#define TMP_DEFAULT_SIZE256
#define HOME_DEFAULT_SIZE USR_DEFAULT_SIZE
//yada yada
Oliver Fromme wrote:
It depends on the FreeBSD version. Older versions mounted
it on /dist, if I remember correctly, but newer ones mount
it directly on /.
I just tried booting to the flash with a cdrom installed so I could run the fixit shell. Apparently the cdrom is mounted on /dist and the
Oliver Fromme wrote:
Brandon Fosdick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
> Determined to press on I tried the "install from existing file
> system" option, w hich I had never noticed before. That didn't work
> since I had no idea what path to give it, or even if the flash drive
> had been mou
heh...typed too fast. It appears that my array filling script didn't die when I
told it to, or maybe an older instance was still running. Hard to say for sure,
but it was still running and when I made room on the array it started filling
it up. Just like it was supposed to.
Sorry for the troub
The machine is an amd64 running 5.4-S with a 3ware 9500S-12 card.
I wrote a test script to fill up the raid array with lots of files, and it did
just that. Afterwards I did a 'rm *' to clean out the test files and naturally
checked the results with ls. All the files were gone. For some reason,
On Sun, Aug 28, 2005 at 04:30:19PM +0400, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> Hi!
>
>
> As for 5.x notes about -O2 (libalias, gcc) were removed at revision
> 1.229.2.7 of /usr/src/share/examples/etc/make.conf. But for 6.0-BETA3
> we do have these warnings. Should they be removed as for 5.x? Is it
> safe to
On 8/28/05, Rong-En Fan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I got a panic on an i386 5.4-STABLE around Aug 28 with SMP enabled.
> It has 2 physical CPU with HTT enabled (so, total 4 cpus).
> This is a NFS server only with external scsi raid attached.
>
> The console log, kgdb output and sysctl.c
Hi,
I got a panic on an i386 5.4-STABLE around Aug 28 with SMP enabled.
It has 2 physical CPU with HTT enabled (so, total 4 cpus).
This is a NFS server only with external scsi raid attached.
The console log, kgdb output and sysctl.conf are as below.
I'll keep this core and if someone is interest
Ivailo Bonev wrote:
What is the difference between installing 5.4 Release in Safe mode and
Normal installation?
Tried installing Normal installation on laptop paniced, but with Safe
mode is ok?
Safe mode disables ACPI/APM, it disables APIC and SMP, it slows down the hard
drives and so forth
Brian Doherty wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm a bit of a newbie, with 5.x and hope someone can help me.
:-) Here goes ...
> I have a dell Latitude D510 with the mist recent BIOS installed.
> I have win XP factory installed, boots fine.
> I have tried installing the following on a partition:
>
> 5.4 Free
Hi!
As for 5.x notes about -O2 (libalias, gcc) were removed at revision
1.229.2.7 of /usr/src/share/examples/etc/make.conf. But for 6.0-BETA3
we do have these warnings. Should they be removed as for 5.x? Is it
safe to use -O2 to build/install kernel, world, ports fro 6.0?
WBR
--
bsam
_
Hello
saw you had written this mail on the freebsd mailinglist.. I have a
Microsoft wireless optical mouse and a keyboard, the keyboard works
just fine but I cant get the mouse to work could you help me? how did
you get it to work?
Håvard Molland
Hello,
I have had a really hard time with thi
What is the difference between installing 5.4 Release in Safe mode and
Normal installation?
Tried installing Normal installation on laptop paniced, but with Safe mode
is ok?
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
22 matches
Mail list logo
