Re: revert broken O_SEARCH

2013-01-13 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Jan 13, 2013, at 12:59 AM, Martin Husemann wrote: On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 08:49:06AM +, David Holland wrote: Nope, don't have that kind of setup and atf is way too invasive to allow just building the test programs somewhere else. ATF is available from pkgsrc and straight forward to

Re: Importing chewiefs

2011-11-23 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Christos Zoulas chris...@astron.com wrote: In article 46DA345771B043F283B5E67C674DAA76@desktop, Adam Hoka adam.h...@gmail.com wrote: Hi! If no one argues otherwise, I would like to import chewiefs to the NetBSD tree. The import would have minimal impact on

Re: ata(4) and NCQ

2011-04-26 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Apr 26, 2011, at 9:22 AM, Eduardo Horvath e...@netbsd.org wrote: On Tue, 26 Apr 2011, Manuel Bouyer wrote: Actually I suspect the idea to have ATA drives show up as SCSI comes from windows. But this was done so on windows because of a limitation of the windows kernel: if you want to have

Re: next vforkup chapter: lwpctl

2011-02-17 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius rm...@netbsd.org wrote: Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: But what, that uses LWPCTL, are you actually supposed to be doing after vfork()?  Whack some environment variables and some globals -- maybe -- then exec*().  What

Re: next vforkup chapter: lwpctl

2011-02-14 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Thor Lancelot Simon t...@panix.com wrote: On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 10:52:16AM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote: Hi Thor,     Do you have performance metrics to back up your statement below about `FreeBSD build[ing] the system slower than we do' (paraphrased)? Yes

Re: NetBSD explodes FreeBSD disklabels if they're at the front of the disk.

2011-02-03 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Thor Lancelot Simon t...@panix.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 01:14:37PM +, David Laight wrote: But this is potentially very dangerous, in combination with COMPAT_386BSD_MBRPART, because FreeBSD considers labels to be per-slice (per fdisk-partition)

Re: Bi-arch 64-bit/32-bit bug in *chflags(2) on NetBSD / standardizing *chflags(2)?

2011-01-18 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:16 PM, matthew green m...@eterna.com.au wrote: Hello NetBSD folks,     I just ran into this issue today (variable length unsigned long used in chflags syscalls) on FreeBSD and I wasn't sure if anyone was aware of the issue yet on NetBSD [1] . Just wanted to let you

Bi-arch 64-bit/32-bit bug in *chflags(2) on NetBSD / standardizing *chflags(2)?

2011-01-17 Thread Garrett Cooper
Hello NetBSD folks, I just ran into this issue today (variable length unsigned long used in chflags syscalls) on FreeBSD and I wasn't sure if anyone was aware of the issue yet on NetBSD [1] . Just wanted to let you guys know so that maybe the 3 major BSDs could get on the same page as far as