> > And I'm not active enough that I feel I have any right to any form of veto.
> >
> Thanks. I'm not against documenting "something", if I understand
> what this "something" should be.
That people absolutely should use ppp -nat instead of pppd+natd, and that
this goes even if people ALREADY has
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 05:43:58PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 07:24:58AM -0800, Eivind Eklund wrote:
> [...]
> > > Okay, here's my question: what is/was so bad about pppd + natd?
> >
> > Generating >10% of the total support load for
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 10:06:14PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Could someone give a quick explanation what INVARIANTS does?
It adds more internal consistency checks to the kernel. This make bugs show
up more promptly and in a more predictable fashion, which again makes it
easier to fix the
(Based on suggestion from Robert Watson.)
I want to enable INVARIANTS by default in -current. This result in some
slowdown, but it also makes it more likely that we'll find bugs quickly.
People that want to run -current should know enough to disable it if it is
in the way, anyway.
Well-reasoned
After discussion with obrien, jhb, and dwithe (and non-protests from
the other committers present), I'm changing the defaults for remote
services in /etc/defaults/rc.conf to the least dangerous
configuration, and making sysinstall write out overrides for the
variables to their former default value
On Thu, Jan 06, 2000 at 09:09:22AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Eivind Eklund writes:
> : I believe putting down RELENG_4 without having a finished IPv6 and
> : functional laptop support (I'm not sure what state this is in right
> : n
On Thu, Jan 06, 2000 at 02:14:04AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Darren Reed wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > For what it's worth, I think releasing 4.0 *without* IPv6 support
> > is a mistake. Why ? Because in < 12 months FreeBSD 5.0 will be
> > released *with* IPv6 support (I'd count IPv6 as being a
On Mon, Nov 29, 1999 at 11:56:31PM +0100, Eivind Eklund wrote:
> I've been peering over the code, and I am unable to find anything
> wrong :-( I've also gotten panic information and symbol information
> from Viren, but this hasn't made me any wiser - the failure was in
&
On Mon, Nov 29, 1999 at 01:52:29PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> :
> : Eivind> I *think* I know what this is due to - please upgrade
> : Eivind> src/sys/nfs/nfs_vnops.c to revision 1.146 (which I just
> : Eivind> committed) and try again.
> :
> :Tried it. Doesn't work. :-( It still crashes when c
On Sat, Nov 27, 1999 at 10:26:15AM -0500, Viren R.Shah wrote:
>
> I'm running a -current system from Nov 26th (approx 4am EST).
>
> I can currently reliably crash the system by doing:
>
> ln -s /home/users/vshah/public_html/index.html /home/users/vshah/index.html
>
>
> The crash only works w
On Mon, Nov 08, 1999 at 01:04:29PM +0200, Valentin Nechayev wrote:
[Regarding a change to UUCP to have it log the username when the
password entry fails]
> > I don't have any religious feeling about this change, and I'm willing
> > to back it out and keep it as a local change again (the way it has
[Mayhaps too many Cc:'s kept in order to reach relevant audience]
On Sun, Oct 10, 1999 at 02:57:55PM -0600, Nate Williams wrote:
> > I Can't believe this email only produced TWO responses!
> > I would have thought that this wouldhav brought out the chainsaws!
> > Maybe no-one is listenning on 'ar
f/else etc. egcs had probably picked up most of the
> problems here before with "ambiguous braces" etc, but this should
> increase the robustness a bit. Based on an idea from Eivind Eklund.
When I tested this, I got significant binary changes after changing
the macros to be .
On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 07:54:03AM -0700, Jonathan M. Bresler wrote:
> >
> > Unless I hear unanimous fierce outcry against it, I'm strongly
> > considering making FTP_PASSIVE_MODE obsolete by virtue of being the
> > default for all tools/libraries which currently examine it.
> > FTP_ACTIVE_MODE wi
On Mon, Mar 08, 1999 at 05:59:05PM -0500, John S. Dyson wrote:
> Eivind Eklund said:
> > If you do not know how FreeBSD works to a detailed enough level to NOT
> > HAVE TO ASK THIS, then you should MAKE WORLD. You should NOT try to
> > do incremental recompiles. That is rese
On Tue, Nov 17, 1998 at 09:49:31PM -0500, HighWind Software Information wrote:
>
> After installing the recent libc_r and libc, I'm getting:
>
> ld.so failed: Undefined symbol "SYS_kldsym" in make:/usr/lib/aout/libc.so.3.1
>
> I also get it sometimes when I link against libc_r.
>
> "SYS_kldsym
On Fri, Feb 26, 1999 at 09:16:44PM +0100, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> (about union mounts on 3.1 not returning all files with an 'ls' in 3.1
> while it did in 3.0)
>
> > Is it sorrect that this magic is implemented in sys/kern/vfs_lookup.c?
> > The odd thing is that AFAICS no-one has made significant cha
On Tue, Feb 23, 1999 at 05:08:57PM +0100, Jos Backus wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 1999 at 04:16:26PM +0100, Eivind Eklund wrote:
> > > Somehow this strikes me as a Bad Thing...
> >
> > It _is_ a bad thing. I've been pondering what to do with the
> > intrusive inv
On Tue, Feb 23, 1999 at 10:59:39AM +0100, Jos Backus wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 1999 at 12:09:03PM +0300, Dmitrij Tejblum wrote:
> > Inline functions in vm/vm_zone.h depend on INVARIANTS. These functions
> > used in msdosfs and in other parts of the kernel.
>
> OK, I see.
>
> > > How does one add
On Wed, Feb 17, 1999 at 06:15:06PM +1030, Greg Lehey wrote:
> On Tuesday, 16 February 1999 at 9:24:31 -0800, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> >> If I have a /etc/defaults/rc.conf, then my /etc/rc.conf won't be consulted.
> >
> > Wrong. You need to read just a bit FURTHER into that file before
> > jumpi
On Thu, Feb 11, 1999 at 09:46:06AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> (2) never question the intentions of a committer particularly
> on a mailing list.
Do NOT follow this rule. We should all be questioned.
Eivind.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" i
On Wed, Feb 10, 1999 at 12:58:39PM +0100, andrea wrote:
> HI
>
> I have a trouble with FreeBSD 2.1.5
This an example of the type of question one DOES NOT ANSWER in
freebsd-current. Instead, send a polite note to the poster telling
him to send his question to questi...@freebsd.org, along with a q
On Tue, Feb 09, 1999 at 08:34:28PM -0500, Gary D. Margiotta wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Don't mean to be a pest, or a PITA by asking this, but is the 3.1 branch
> still scheduled for the middle of this month? I haven't seen much on the
> list recently about it, but probably haven't been paying enough att
On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 08:14:55PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> This does not make any operational change except to get rid
> of the $conf_dir junk from rc.conf, which I originally put
> in to try to bootstrap rc.diskless.
>
> A much better way to do rc.diskless was suggested to
On Fri, Jan 29, 1999 at 12:05:04PM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 29 Jan 1999 20:01:23 +1030, Greg Lehey wrote:
>
> > > I can't imagine how unnecessary parens are going to improve
> > > "readability" for anyone who knows his/her operator precedence.
> >
> > What about the others?
>
I'm moving this to FreeBSD-arch, due to taking the discussion quite a
bit in that direction.
On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 11:44:35AM -0800, Sean Eric Fagan wrote:
> In article
> <29763.917434096.kithrup.freebsd.curr...@critter.freebsd.dk> you
> write:
> >The biggest impact of this is a new argument to
On Fri, Jan 15, 1999 at 09:12:07PM -0800, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> I was thinking about the DIAGNOSTICS replacement macros and
> had a random thought...
>
> Suppose you're sitting in front of a ddb (or better yet gdb) prompt
> because your kernel has just crashed due to who knows what reason.
> What
27 matches
Mail list logo
