All functional parts are done (unless I forgot something..)
patch for /etc is included (against CURRENT), and tested on my laptop.
In my case, with rcexecr and the patch, the time for launching rc.d
scripts reduces from 35s to 26s.
manpage is updated, but I think my English needs some fix :p
Re
On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 07:52:31AM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 05:54:49AM +0400, Andrey Chernov wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 02:48:59PM +, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > > On a freshly installed -CURRENT, to view a colorized manpage in color
> > > and in full terminal
2011/6/4 Andriy Gapon :
> on 03/06/2011 20:57 Robert N. M. Watson said the following:
>>
>> On 3 Jun 2011, at 16:13, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder if anybody uses kdb_stop_cpus with non-default value. If, yes, I
>>> am very interested to learn about your usecase for it.
>>
>> The issue that p
2011/6/3 Nathan Whitehorn :
> On 06/03/11 10:13, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>
>> I wonder if anybody uses kdb_stop_cpus with non-default value.
>> If, yes, I am very interested to learn about your usecase for it.
>>
>> I think that the default kdb behavior is the correct one, so it doesn't
>> make sense
Mikolaj,
Upon further investigation it appears that there is a logic mistake in
hastd's server/client buffering code. I've just applied a fix and it
immediately solved the issue for me. Please see r222688 for details.
I plan to MFC it ASAP, as otherwise hastd is not functional when
compressi
stof:
Thanks for the detailed report, and yes, it looks like that is exactly what is
required. Could you try the attached patch?
Robert
20110604-divert-fix.diff
Description: Binary data
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebs
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011, Gavin Atkinson wrote:
...
maybe I found something:
After setting vfs.zfs.debug=1 I got two new verbose bootlogs:
http://people.freebsd.org/~mr/boot_fail2.txt
http://people.freebsd.org/~mr/boot_success2.txt
As you can see, in the failing case ZFS tries to attac
Aryeh Friedman writes:
> Some time in the last 2 weeks (I am sure when) a commit caused many
> ports that assume a "standard" utmp/utmp.x to break for example
> x11-toolkits/vte produces:
I guess it's a user error, utmpx.h and utmp.h shouldn't both be present.
See similar issue
http://lists.f
On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 12:45:37PM +0100, Julien Laffaye wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Buganini wrote:
> > https://github.com/buganini/rcexecr
> > Currently it is able to determine the exec/wait order
> > There are something I haven't digged in deeply in the "self
> > modification" p
On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 05:54:49AM +0400, Andrey Chernov wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 02:48:59PM +, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > On a freshly installed -CURRENT, to view a colorized manpage in color
> > and in full terminal width, try this:
> >
> > env MANCOLOR=yes MANWIDTH=tty man grotty
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Buganini wrote:
> https://github.com/buganini/rcexecr
>
> Currently it is able to determine the exec/wait order
>
> There are something I haven't digged in deeply in the "self modification"
> part.
>
> patches/ideas are welcome.
Hello,
Thanks for doing that!
Yo
Attilio Rao wrote:
> Current maximum number of CPUs supported by the FreeBSD kernel is 32.
> That number cames from indirectly by the fact that we have a cpumask_t
> type, representing a mask of CPUs, which is an unsigned int right now.
> I then made a patch that removes the cpumask_t type and us
https://github.com/buganini/rcexecr
Currently it is able to determine the exec/wait order
There are something I haven't digged in deeply in the "self modification" part.
patches/ideas are welcome.
Regards,
Buganini
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mai
On 4 Jun 2011, at 09:22, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 03/06/2011 20:57 Robert N. M. Watson said the following:
>>
>> On 3 Jun 2011, at 16:13, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder if anybody uses kdb_stop_cpus with non-default value. If, yes, I
>>> am very interested to learn about your usecase for i
on 03/06/2011 20:57 Robert N. M. Watson said the following:
>
> On 3 Jun 2011, at 16:13, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
>> I wonder if anybody uses kdb_stop_cpus with non-default value. If, yes, I
>> am very interested to learn about your usecase for it.
>
> The issue that prompted the sysctl was non-NMI
15 matches
Mail list logo