Yes, it is there, thank you (:
Mitt
Hello,
>>> Did you delete the first 2 lines?
I didn't have "exec tail -n +3 $0"
and I removed that "echo EOF" frame,
so now it looks like this:
--
#!/bin/sh -e
exec tail -n +3 $0
menuentry "NetBSD 7.0" {
insmod ufs2
set root=(hd0,msdos2)
knetbsd /netbsd --root=wd0a
Good day,
First of all, I try to get GNOME 2 to work solely for
fun. Just because it's offered. I have a
(precisely) working Xfce desktop on another installation.
Second, I dislike dbus as much as you do.
We usually compare it to systemd, because
most of desktop packages depend on it, but it
is
Date:Thu, 03 Dec 2015 10:30:44 +0300
From:Mitt Green
Message-ID: <20151203073044.5869651.9905.3...@yahoo.com>
| Third, there is no dbus script,
Look in /usr/pkg/share/examples/rc.d
If you installed dbus from pkgsrc, the rc.d script will be
On Thu, 3 Dec 2015, Emile `iMil' Heitor wrote:
I know, right? And yes results are identical with differents bs values.
I've tried a bazillion NFS options on the clients (TCP, UDP, {r,w}size from
8192
to 64k...), tried many OSes as a client, the NFS results are consistent,
always between 20
On Thu, 3 Dec 2015, Michael van Elst wrote:
reading with rsize=64k: ~ 90MB/s
reading with rsize=32k: ~ 60MB/s
writing with wsize=64k: ~ 40MB/s
writing with wsize=32k: ~ 30MB/s
Well, I have similar results except I get better performances while
reading/writing with {r,w}size=32k instead of 64,
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 08:23:28PM +, Michael van Elst wrote:
>
> That's probably why setting the queues all to fcfs is the best
> for you.
Not as dramatic as Emile's numbers but significantly higher read
throughput:
# for i in disksort fcfs priocscan; do
for j in wd0 wd1 raid0;
On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 07:43:10PM +0100, Petar Bogdanovic wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 08:23:28PM +, Michael van Elst wrote:
> >
> > That's probably why setting the queues all to fcfs is the best
> > for you.
>
> Not as dramatic as Emile's numbers but significantly higher read
>