People replying to this, please don't keep up the cross-posting, but
choose tech@ OR misc@.
Or start a new thread.
/Alexander
On 08/20/12 23:01, Gilles Chehade wrote:
Dear misc@ and tech@,
We are getting closer to a stable version of OpenSMTPD and now would be
the perfect time for you to sta
On Aug 20 23:01:44, Gilles Chehade wrote:
> Dear misc@ and tech@,
>
> We are getting closer to a stable version of OpenSMTPD and now would be
> the perfect time for you to start stress-testing and trying to crash it
> in various ways to make sure it is rock-solid.
>
> Eric's recent commits brough
Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,
herzlichen Glückwunsch, zu Ihrer gewonnenen Urlaubsreise.
Die Details zu Ihrem Gewinn finden Sie im Anhang als PDF.
Wir wünschen schon jetzt einen schönen Urlaub in der Türkei
Ihre S. Hoffmann
[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/octet-stream wh
I've being working on a project that involves MPLS and OpenBSD, I
recently started coding and I would really love to get some
comments/advices about it.
This thread will contain code about the wire(4) pseudo device (RFC4448),
it will be used in the future by ldpd(8) or ifconfig(8) to configure
pse
On 2012/08/22 06:13, mu...@nitrkl.ac.in wrote:
> >
> > If you try an amd64 -current snapshot, are the disks detected?
> >
> > Can you install to a USB stick and get a dmesg / pcidump / acpidump for
> > amd64?
> >
> Yes in amd64 -current snapshot disks are detected. and installation
> complete succe
>> > On 19 August 2012 08:52, wrote:
>> >> I am using openbsd 5.1 i386 arch. While installing openbsd5.1 i get
>> >> these
>> >> error message.
>> >>
>> >> acpi0 at bios0:rev2uvm_fault (0xd07ea4,.)
>> >> fatal page_fault (6) in supervisor mode
>> >> trap type 6 code 0eipd02ef7
>> > On 19 August 2012 08:52, wrote:
>> >> I am using openbsd 5.1 i386 arch. While installing openbsd5.1 i get
>> >> these
>> >> error message.
>> >>
>> >> acpi0 at bios0:rev2uvm_fault (0xd07ea4,.)
>> >> fatal page_fault (6) in supervisor mode
>> >> trap type 6 code 0eipd02ef7
å¤ä¼¤è£³è§è©æ¶¨æç¬è
¿èæ·æ¸¡Â
                                      Â
                                     Â
   ä¼Â                      Â
æ¿Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
>> > On 19 August 2012 08:52, wrote:
>> >> I am using openbsd 5.1 i386 arch. While installing openbsd5.1 i get
>> >> these
>> >> error message.
>> >>
>> >> acpi0 at bios0:rev2uvm_fault (0xd07ea4,.)
>> >> fatal page_fault (6) in supervisor mode
>> >> trap type 6 code 0eipd02ef7
2012/8/21 Miod Vallat
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a problem with gcc. I want use gcov but i can't compile my
> programs.
> > It generate .gcda file if i use gcc of ports tree.
> >
> > $ gcc -Wall -g --coverage -o sample sample.c
> > /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lgcov
> > collect2: ld returned 1 exit stat
> Hi,
>
> I have a problem with gcc. I want use gcov but i can't compile my programs.
> It generate .gcda file if i use gcc of ports tree.
>
> $ gcc -Wall -g --coverage -o sample sample.c
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lgcov
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
Argh. Turns out we are not building
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 10:10:39AM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
> since you have -Werror in your CFLAGS, sndio fails a build with
> WARNINGS=Yes...
>
> The following patch fixes things.
> - hex constants are unsigned.
OK, sure
> - prototypes for everything.
Why, aren't forward declaration good eno
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 12:35:21PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
> Is there any actual reason for these restrictions ?
>
> I can understanding preventing stuff if it breaks, but I don't think
> it does ?
>
Actually most of these are not restrictions but assertions to force
incorrect programs to fail
> Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 19:33:38 +0200
> From: Martin Pieuchot
>
> Is it better to use a __powerpc__ define instead? I don't think we're
> going to use drm on socppc but...
Using __powerpc__ would be better. With that change, ok kettenis@
> Index: drmP.h
>
> Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 19:17:08 +0200
> From: Martin Pieuchot
>
> Diff below is mostly a rewrite of vgafb_pci_probe() to determine the
> memory and mmio regions based on previously initialized BAR structures.
> But it also includes the glue to attach drm(4) to vgafb(4).
>
> It reuses the follo
On 21/08/12(Tue) 19:33, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Is it better to use a __powerpc__ define instead? I don't think we're
> going to use drm on socppc but...
It looks like the answer is yes, so here's the diff with __powerpc__.
Ok?
Index: drmP.h
=
On x86, the xchg operation between reg and mem has an implicit lock
prefix, i.e. it is a relatively expensive atomic operation. This is not
needed here.
--- a/sys/arch/i386/i386/locore.s
+++ b/sys/arch/i386/i386/locore.s
@@ -802,8 +802,9 @@ ENTRY(bcopy)
*/
ENTRY(memcpy)
movl4(%es
Is it better to use a __powerpc__ define instead? I don't think we're
going to use drm on socppc but...
Ok?
Index: drmP.h
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/pci/drm/drmP.h,v
retrieving revision 1.130
diff -u -p -r1.130 drmP.h
--- drmP.h
Diff below is mostly a rewrite of vgafb_pci_probe() to determine the
memory and mmio regions based on previously initialized BAR structures.
But it also includes the glue to attach drm(4) to vgafb(4).
It reuses the following functions from vga(4), the last three are
required by any drm(4) driver:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 04:45:28PM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> inet6(4):
>
> The behavior of AF_INET6 TCP/UDP socket is documented in RFC 2553.
> Basically, it says the following:
>
after some feedback, i'm proposing the following changes:
- remove the text which describes what rfc
> > bswap32 == swap32 for OpenBSD.
> >
> > I think it would be better if you used swap32() here.
>
> No htole32() is better in this context. Linux and FreeBSD get away
> with using "swap" functions because this is in an #if BYTE_ORDER ==
> BIG_ENDIAN block, but CPU_TO_LE32() is supposed to trans
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
What do yo suggest then? Use a separate timeout? Accept the lower
performance?
what is the performance difference in terms of pps on small packets
and Mbps for large are we talking about?
UD
On k, aug 21, 2012 at 15:12:44 +0200, LEVAI Daniel wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've stumbled upon this:
>
> Index: route.8
> ===
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/route/route.8,v
> retrieving revision 1.70
> diff -p -u -r1.70 route.8
> --- route.8 13
Hi!
I've stumbled upon this:
Index: route.8
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/route/route.8,v
retrieving revision 1.70
diff -p -u -r1.70 route.8
--- route.8 13 Jul 2012 10:15:53 - 1.70
+++ route.8 21 Aug 2012 13:10:40 -000
Habilidades Administrativas para Gerentes Desorganizados
Panama 30 de Agosto, 2012
SHERATON PANAMA HOTEL & CONVENTION CENTER
¡Olvídese del desorden, el estrés, las cargas y horarios de trabajo caóticos!
La carencia de objetivos, la falta de planeación, estructuras deficientes de
la organización, pr
> Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 07:30:42 -0400
> From: Brad Smith
>
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 01:12:28PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > Diff below correctly defines the CPU_TO_LE32() macro for needed for
> > big-endian machines on OpenBSD. This is required to use dri on macppc.
> >
> > I'll do the
> Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 13:12:28 +0200
> From: Martin Pieuchot
>
> Diff below correctly defines the CPU_TO_LE32() macro for needed for
> big-endian machines on OpenBSD. This is required to use dri on macppc.
>
> I'll do the necessary to get this upstream once it's in our tree.
>
> Tested with
On 21/08/12(Tue) 07:30, Brad Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 01:12:28PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > Diff below correctly defines the CPU_TO_LE32() macro for needed for
> > big-endian machines on OpenBSD. This is required to use dri on macppc.
> >
> > I'll do the necessary to get this
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
>
> What do yo suggest then? Use a separate timeout? Accept the lower
> performance?
>
what is the performance difference in terms of pps on small packets
and Mbps for large are we talking about?
> Resetting the device in the watchdog has an
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
Because the interrupt load increases by approx. 7000 per second. I think
the
problem is that the backend sends packets faster than openbsd can enqueue
them. This means that the tx queue will be empty often, and each time an
tx
interrupt will be triggered
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 01:12:28PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Diff below correctly defines the CPU_TO_LE32() macro for needed for
> big-endian machines on OpenBSD. This is required to use dri on macppc.
>
> I'll do the necessary to get this upstream once it's in our tree.
>
> Tested with th
Diff below correctly defines the CPU_TO_LE32() macro for needed for
big-endian machines on OpenBSD. This is required to use dri on macppc.
I'll do the necessary to get this upstream once it's in our tree.
Tested with the r200 driver, ok?
Martin
Index: src/mesa/main//compiler.h
===
32 matches
Mail list logo
