Re[2]: BRAVO 4.4 TEAM!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hello j, Friday, September 21, 2001, 12:09:09 AM, you wrote: On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 04:29:49PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | BRAVO to the 4.4 Team | | My update from 4.3 to 4.4 (custom kernel too) when absolutely | flawlessly!!! Binary or

Re[2]: KERNCONF instead of KERNEL?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hello Bob, Friday, March 02, 2001, 7:52:33 PM, you wrote: You can't reboot to single user mode when you are doing a remote update. He is specifically asking about the best way to do a remote update. You have to do everything multiuser and accept the

4.2 STABLE kernel broken?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hello, I built new world and kernels today. Trying to boot them, I always run into the following: Copyright (c) 1992-2001 The FreeBSD Project. Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of

IPFilter 3.4.11 into stable?

Hello, I like ipfilter pretty much and after the recent release of 3.4.11 I'm wondering if there are any plans to merge it into 4-STABLE (where's still 3.4.8 which has got some issues with the FTP proxy)? Best regards, Gabriel To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with

Re[2]: Freebsd vs. UPS

Hello Alfred, Monday, September 25, 2000, 8:45:31 PM, you wrote: Check ports, there should be some stuff to talk to APC power supplies. There are some ports: bkpupsd upsd upsmon you could probably jury rig it so that several servers talking over the network could be informed from the main

Re[2]: FreeBSD 4.1-STABLE is about as stable as windows98

I missed the start of this, but if this is VIA and UDMA66 with ICRC errors and generally unstable fs's, count me in too. I just used sysctl to put the drive into PIO mode to get around it for now. Not sure at what mode mines are running (most likely UDMA 33 as I can't use normal 80pin UDMA

Re[4]: FreeBSD 4.1-STABLE is about as stable as windows98

Hello Luke, Monday, August 21, 2000, 5:59:54 PM, you wrote: I am using: FreeBSD 4.1-STABLE #0: Mon Aug 7 19:35:50 atapci0: VIA 82C686 ATA66 controller port 0xb800-0xb80f at device 4.1 on pci0 ad0: 19574MB IBM-DPTA-372050 [39770/16/63] at ata0-master using UDMA66 with an 80 pin cable I

Re[2]: top problem with 4.1-STABLE

Hello Sean, Friday, August 11, 2000, 8:33:17 PM, you wrote: The "nlist failed" error usually implies that you didn't use /boot/loader to boot the machine or your boot blocks are out of whack with the system. That's correct. After the last reboot (which I did in order to get the newly