Title: BSD slice
Should mounting a FreeBSD slice be the same as mounting a partition? I can see the slice with fdsik, I can mount some of the slices, but not all of them. Does that mean anything to anyone? I think the slice might be big, like, 45Gig. Does that matter???
Thanks.
Title: bsd
I am trying to mount redhat 9 to a freeBSD partition.
I used a mount line that whould work, but it doesn't see the partition.
The drive is from a maxtor maxattach 4000. Anyone have any info on this?
Thank you.
Hi Alan,
> > mount -t ufs -o ufstype=44bsd /dev/sdb[5-8] /mnt/BSD
> > Partition check:
> > sdb:
> >sdb1:
>
> Iirc you have to mount the whole slice at once. The subpartitions are then
> recognized. In your case that would be mount -t ufs -o ufstype=
Hi Alan,
> mount -t ufs -o ufstype=44bsd /dev/sdb[5-8] /mnt/BSD
>
> meaning, for each of the entries under the extended partition entry
> each rendering the generic and not too helpful message:
>
> mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/hda[5-8],
&g
sing on a FreeBSD OS box. With all the other
> > filesystems addressed by kernel modules, I was sure I'd be able to
> > scan the drive. Now I'm not so sure. What can be done to make the
> > filesystem available on my RedHat Linux box?
>
> man mount. Or more specificall
27;d be able to
> scan the drive. Now I'm not so sure. What can be done to make the
> filesystem available on my RedHat Linux box?
man mount. Or more specifically
mount -t ufs -o ufstype=44bsd /dev/hdx /mnt/BSD
Bye,
Leonard.
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMA
Downsizing has taken it toll in my company and now I've got the job of
recovering the files from a couple of projects off a couple of drives
a co-worker was using on a FreeBSD OS box. With all the other
filesystems addressed by kernel modules, I was sure I'd be able to
scan the drive. Now I'm no
Hello Guys,
I am currently having a problem with pppd. I had to re-compile pppd 2.4.0 to
include the callback stuff (maybe RedHat can make us a rpm ?)
The problem is that I can't find bsd-comp. Anybody got any idea where it
is/how it is install ?
I first installed the 2.4.1 rpm and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17-Aug-2002/22:45 -0400, "Jonathan M. Slivko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>This is my $0.02 cents on the subject:
>
>FreeBSD appears to handle better and is more business-centric whereas
>Red Hat, if used properly, can be the same. However, FreeBSD
onsultant/Systems Admin.
http://home.acedsl.com/~jslivko/
p: 212.663.1109 f: 212.663.1109
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of David Kramer
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 10:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROT
On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Jonathan Bartlett wrote:
> > Yes and no. Linux is more in the news and popular these days, so you
> > might find user apps coming out for linux before BSD (of course the
> > linux apps will still run on BSD), but some companies will release drivers
> &
> Yes and no. Linux is more in the news and popular these days, so you
> might find user apps coming out for linux before BSD (of course the
> linux apps will still run on BSD), but some companies will release drivers
> for BSD before linux so they don't have to give away the
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Anthony E. Greene wrote:
> The GPL helps to ensure that improvements are shared. The BSD License
> makes it easier for improvements to be kept hidden. Many more people are
> willing to share if they can be sure that the sharing goes both ways.
OTOH, some compa
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Matt Rowley wrote:
> > In my opinion, BSD is mainly used by some for
> > webservers, mailservers, firewalls, etc, and not the
> > desktop/workstation because of the extra layer needed to run linux
> > apps.
>
> This is just plain wrong. FreeBSD
> As you said, BSD is UNIX not Linux. Has been around for 30 years I
> believe.
The original AT&T Unix by Thompson and Ritchie is around 30 years old.
"BSD" as in the Berkeley Software Distribution is 25.
You keep referring to FreeBSD, but that's just one of several fla
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 15-Aug-2002/21:54 -0400, Arthur Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi !
>Recently there was some chat about "real Unix".
>Was there any seminal comparative studies between FreeBSD (or even
>NetBSD) and Linux ? BSD has be
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 09:54:03PM -0400 or thereabouts, Arthur Chan wrote:
> Hi !
> Recently there was some chat about "real Unix".
As you said, BSD is UNIX not Linux. Has been around for 30 years I
believe. It (FreeBSD) will run Linux apps and gui by their ports
system, and
nux ?
I am quite curious as to what you mean by comparative studies between the two
?
If you are trying to compare two OS's I am sure that a simple google search
would yeild the desired results.
> BSD has been around a long time.
So has Sys V ... I mean that it all started
Hi !
Recently there was some chat about "real
Unix".
Was there any seminal comparative studies
between FreeBSD (or even NetBSD) and Linux ?
BSD has been around a long time.
Why Linux ? Why not BSD ? Drivers ? Platforms and
chipsets ?
Are there anything one can do with Linux which
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 11:45:33AM +0700, Lewi wrote:
> I want to know about how Linux developer porting BSD to Linux, like
> ping BSD's source, I see that there has many different comparing ping
> that I get it from iputils-xx.src.rpm
>
> so how the process go??
> is there
I want to know about how Linux developer porting BSD to Linux, like ping BSD's source,
I see that there has many different comparing ping that I get it from
iputils-xx.src.rpm
so how the process go??
is there any documentation that discuss about this??
--
ichtus
--
Lewi Supranata .
Umm, One other major difference. SYSV uses STREAMS. Yeah, all that other
stuff is cosmetic. BSD was the first to implement IP in the kernel (as
well as ethernet). SYSV came up with STREAMS as the way to not be trapped
into IP.
--
-Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies like a banana. Stranger
Dear sir
Thank u so much for very good explanation of BSD & SysV . I am really very
much happy with write up. It is really a great write up.
Thank u very very much.
Selim
- Original Message -
From: "Michael R. Jinks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sat, Sep 30, 2000 at 01:39:15PM +0600, Selim Jahangir wrote:
> what is the fundamental diff between BSD and SysV unix ?
I'm not really qualified to answer this but it looked as though nobody else
has mailed the list about it so I'll have a go.
The _fundamental_ difference
On Sat, 30 Sep 2000, Selim Jahangir wrote:
> Dear all
> what is the fundamental diff between BSD and SysV unix ?
>
> Explanation is expected .
>
> Another question:
> What is this file " initrd.img" during boot time ?
>
itird=Initial Ram Disk. It's a &
modules-enabled, will be ready
for use.
try "man mkinitrd" for details.
Selim Jahangir wrote:
>
> Dear all
> what is the fundamental diff between BSD and SysV unix ?
>
> Explanation is expected .
>
> Another question:
> What is this file " initrd.img&
Dear all
what is the fundamental diff between BSD and SysV unix ?
Explanation is expected .
Another question:
What is this file " initrd.img" during boot time ?
Thanks
selim
___
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTEC
On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Arni Raghu wrote:
> I have a bunch of machines mostly linux and 1/2 BSD boxes...Now to disable
> user accounts I simple append a "*" to the passwd field in the shadow
> file..It works just fine..
>
> Now I try the same on my BSD box..no luck it
try passwd -l username
fil
On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Arni Raghu wrote:
>Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 11:24:43 -0500
>From: Arni Raghu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: la <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: OT: Linux and BSD..helpw with disabling accts..
>
>Hi,
&
Hi,
I have a bunch of machines mostly linux and 1/2 BSD boxes...Now to disable
user accounts I simple append a "*" to the passwd field in the shadow
file..It works just fine..
Now I try the same on my BSD box..no luck it just logs the user in..of
course right now I have the shell point
30 matches
Mail list logo
