On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:35:23PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
D> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 07:52:41PM -0600, Brooks Davis wrote:
D> > B> While this is the documented path, it's not actually been required
D> > B> except in edge cases for ages (the last I can remember is a.out->elf).
D> > B> It's been
Am 21.12.2011 22:49, schrieb Johan Hendriks:
> Nice page, but one thing i do not get is the following.
>
> [quote]
> If you compare FreeBSD / GCC 4.2.1 against, for example, Ubuntu / GCC
> 4.7 then the results are unlikely to tell you anything meaningful about
> FreeBSD vs Ubuntu.
> [/quote]
>
>
On 22.12.11 00:33, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
Using the same argument one can say that Ferrari F430 vs Toyota Prius
is a meaningless comparison because the under-the-hood equipment is
different.
Of course, it is meaningless, the Ferrari will lose big time in the
fuel consumption comparison! I
On 21.12.11 23:49, Johan Hendriks wrote:
I my opinion, you benchmark the latest release of Linux, FreeBSD,
Solaris, Windows and whatever OS you want to compare!
There is no 'general benchmark' as there is not one single tasks that
all computers are used for.
If you want to benchmark so
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:49 PM, Johan Hendriks wrote:
> Alexander Leidinger schreef:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> while the discussion continued here, some work started at some other
>> place. Now... in case someone here is willing to help instead of talking,
>> feel free to go to http://wiki.freebsd.org/Ben
On 21 December 2011 22:03, Freddie Cash wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Johan Hendriks
> wrote:
>> Nice page, but one thing i do not get is the following.
>>
>> [quote]
>> If you compare FreeBSD / GCC 4.2.1 against, for example, Ubuntu / GCC 4.7
>> then the results are unlikely to tell
OS: FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT/amd64 r228787
Since the last update of world yesterday were I managed to compile the
OS WITH_LIBCPLUSPLUS=YES in /etc/src.conf,
only root is capable to login on the console.
I use OpenLDAP 2.4 as the backend for usual users, having also an
"emergency" user installed in th
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Johan Hendriks wrote:
> Nice page, but one thing i do not get is the following.
>
> [quote]
> If you compare FreeBSD / GCC 4.2.1 against, for example, Ubuntu / GCC 4.7
> then the results are unlikely to tell you anything meaningful about FreeBSD
> vs Ubuntu.
> [/qu
Alexander Leidinger schreef:
Hi,
while the discussion continued here, some work started at some other place.
Now... in case someone here is willing to help instead of talking, feel free to
go to http://wiki.freebsd.org/BenchmarkAdvice and have a look what can be
improved. The page is far from
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:23:54PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> Considering r228571: we need to specify vhid as additional address
> attribute in atomic manner, via one ioctl(). Address can't be first
> configured, and then made redundant, that would lead it to being
> static for a short period, s
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 3:28:42 pm Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:25:18PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 11:13:10 am Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:31:11AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, December 2
On 12/21/2011 4:55 AM, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> Brooks,
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 07:52:41PM -0600, Brooks Davis wrote:
> B> While this is the documented path, it's not actually been required
> B> except in edge cases for ages (the last I can remember is a.out->elf).
> B> It's been long enough t
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:25:18PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 11:13:10 am Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:31:11AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, December 20, 2011 5:18:58 pm m...@freebsd.org wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at
Hi,
while the discussion continued here, some work started at some other place.
Now... in case someone here is willing to help instead of talking, feel free to
go to http://wiki.freebsd.org/BenchmarkAdvice and have a look what can be
improved. The page is far from perfect and needs some additio
on 21/12/2011 18:38 Hans Petter Selasky said the following:
> On Wednesday 21 December 2011 12:29:49 Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> on 20/12/2011 14:25 Andriy Gapon said the following:
>>> I just wanted to draw your attention to the fact that obtaining any locks
>>> in the kdb context (or USB polling code
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 11:02:24 am Robert N. M. Watson wrote:
>
> On 21 Dec 2011, at 15:31, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, December 20, 2011 5:18:58 pm m...@freebsd.org wrote:
> >> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:49 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> >>> Hmm, if these functions are expected to
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 11:13:10 am Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:31:11AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Tuesday, December 20, 2011 5:18:58 pm m...@freebsd.org wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:49 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > > Hmm, if these functions are exp
On Wednesday 21 December 2011 12:29:49 Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 20/12/2011 14:25 Andriy Gapon said the following:
> > I just wanted to draw your attention to the fact that obtaining any locks
> > in the kdb context (or USB polling code in general, even) is not a good
> > idea. Chances of getting in
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 04:55:40PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> Brooks,
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 07:52:41PM -0600, Brooks Davis wrote:
> B> While this is the documented path, it's not actually been required
> B> except in edge cases for ages (the last I can remember is a.out->elf).
> B> It's
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:31:11AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 20, 2011 5:18:58 pm m...@freebsd.org wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:49 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > Hmm, if these functions are expected to operate like 'write(2)' and are
> > > supposed to return the numbe
On 21 Dec 2011, at 15:31, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 20, 2011 5:18:58 pm m...@freebsd.org wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:49 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
>>> Hmm, if these functions are expected to operate like 'write(2)' and are
>>> supposed to return the number of bytes written,
On Tuesday, December 20, 2011 5:18:58 pm m...@freebsd.org wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:49 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> > Hmm, if these functions are expected to operate like 'write(2)' and are
> > supposed to return the number of bytes written, shouldn't their return value
> > be 'ssize_t' inst
21.12.2011, 04:28, "O. Hartmann" :
> On 12/21/11 00:29, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:54:23PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote:
>>> On 12/20/11 22:45, Samuel J. Greear wrote:
http://www.osnews.com/story/25334/DragonFly_BSD_MP_Performance_Significantly_Improved
Brooks,
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 07:52:41PM -0600, Brooks Davis wrote:
B> While this is the documented path, it's not actually been required
B> except in edge cases for ages (the last I can remember is a.out->elf).
B> It's been long enough that I don't think we can really make people do
B> it exc
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 03:29:25PM -0800, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
>
> This also interested me:
>
> * Linux system crashed
> http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/kernel/2011-11/msg8.html
>
> * OpenIndiana system crashed same way as Linux system
> http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchiv
Dear all,
I would like to remind you that the next round of status reports
covering the fourth quarter of 2011 are due on January 15th, 2011.
As this initiative is very popular among our users, I would like to
ask you to submit your status reports as sooner than later (holidays
are quickly approa
on 20/12/2011 14:25 Andriy Gapon said the following:
> I just wanted to draw your attention to the fact that obtaining any locks in
> the
> kdb context (or USB polling code in general, even) is not a good idea.
> Chances of getting into trouble on those locks are probably quite moderate or
> even
On 21. Dec 2011, at 02:23 , Doug Barton wrote:
> On 12/20/2011 02:01, Claude Buisson wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> It seems (from my own csup's and cvswe.cgi) that the src commits are lost,
>> starting with r228697 Sun Dec 18 22:04:55 2011)
>
> Yeah, my warning 2 days ago that this was going to happen se
on 21/12/2011 11:31 Larry Rosenman said the following:
> Lsof..
> And this seems like a contradiction between the string.h declaration and the
> built-in one.
It more looks like you include machine/cpufunc.h before strings.h and that has
an undesired side effect.
--
Andriy Gapon
___
Lsof..
And this seems like a contradiction between the string.h declaration and the
built-in one.
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
Hi Larry,
On Tue, 20 Dec 2011, Larry Rosenman wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash:
30 matches
Mail list logo
