From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Nov 27 09:39:28 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA01260 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 27 Nov 1996 09:39:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from hil-img-1.compuserve.com (hil-img-1.compuserve.com [149.174.177.131]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA01253 for ; Wed, 27 Nov 1996 09:39:24 -0800 (PST) From: Lotus_Mail_Exchange@CSERVE4.CCMAIL.compuserve.com Received: by hil-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id MAA12124; Wed, 27 Nov 1996 12:38:53 -0500 Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 11:46:53 -0500 Subject: NON-DELIVERY of: hackers-digest V1 #1668 To: "INTERNET:hackers@freefall.freebsd.org" Message-ID: <199611271238_MC1-BC4-D9D9@compuserve.com> Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Sender: owner-hackers-digest@freefall.freebsd.org Received: from ns2.harborcom.net (ns2.harborcom.net [206.158.4.4]) by hil-img-4.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id HAA01690; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 07:12:14 -0500 From: Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.18]) by ns2.harborcom.net (8.8.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id HAA00576; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 07:10:18 -0500 (EST) Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id CAA12234 for freebsd-hackers-digest-outgoing; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 02:45:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 02:45:54 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199611221045.CAA12234@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-hackers-digest@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: hackers-digest V1 #1668 Reply-To: hackers@freefall.freebsd.org Errors-To: owner-hackers-digest@freefall.freebsd.org Precedence: bulk hackers-digest Friday, 22 November 1996 Volume 01 : Number 1668 In this issue: IBM 57SLC Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Re: arpresolve errors Re: IBM 57SLC Re: IBM 57SLC Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Re: Disk Striping Re: Pentium Pro status Re: Pentium Pro status Re: Disk Striping Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Re: panic: ffs_valloc: dup alloc Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Re: Who needs Perl? We do! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kjell E Grotland Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 20:29:27 -0500 (EST) Subject: IBM 57SLC Hopefully this is not too trivial a matter but i was wondering if it is possible to Run FreeBSD on an IBM 57SLC. The reason i ask is because apparently this is a machine on which IBM place its proprietary Micro Channel Bus system and i was wondering if it made a difference in installing the FreeBSD Operating system. If not underwhich type of hardware configuration should i install the operating system? Thank you for your help in this matter Kjell Kjell E. Grotland kegrotla@korrnet.org Where do you seek the Beloved? ------------------------------ From: Michael Smith Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 12:10:02 +1030 (CST) Subject: Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Nate Williams stands accused of saying: > > > > That's all well and good, but it presents a chicken-and-egg situation > > for anyone trying to work outside the decades-old BSD model. You may > > not consider this a problem; I do. Opinions differ. > > Yes, but anyone capable of developing a 'cool tool' with TCL that we > can't live w/out is capable of installing a port, and *then* showing me > how wonderful it is to justify bringing in TCL as part of the base > system. > > Put the cart *before* the horse. Chicken->egg, egg->chicken? I can say that I wouldn't have undertaken what I have if Tcl wasn't a part of the standard system - too many people would say "but it needs Tcl, and I don't want to install that because ...". I figure that once it is clear that Perl is intended to be a part of the base system, and that it's a stable item not going anywhere, people should pick up and start using it. And the ultimate comeback is; if I'm wrong, and after 12 months nothing has made use of it and everybody hates it, it can go away again. At that point, there can be (even though there would be 8) no argument. > Nate - -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control. (ph) +61-8-8267-3493 [[ ]] Unix hardware collector. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[ ------------------------------ From: Bill Fenner Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 17:47:26 PST Subject: Re: arpresolve errors In message you wri te: >I'll put a watcher program on >/var/log/messages to do a netstat -rn when it sees the arpresolve messages. Please do; it's likely to be the only way to track down why you're seeing them. Bill ------------------------------ From: Michael Smith Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 12:48:29 +1030 (CST) Subject: Re: IBM 57SLC Kjell E Grotland stands accused of saying: > Hopefully this is not too trivial a matter but i was wondering if it is > possible to Run FreeBSD on an IBM 57SLC. The reason i ask is because > apparently this is a machine on which IBM place its proprietary Micro > Channel Bus system and i was wondering if it made a difference in > installing the FreeBSD Operating system. If not underwhich type of > hardware configuration should i install the operating system? FreeBSD does not currently support Microchannel. If you need a Unix to run on that system, you may be able to get a PS/2 AIX to work. For FreeBSD, PCI is the bus of choice; EISA and ISA also work well. > Kjell E. Grotland - -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control. (ph) +61-8-8267-3493 [[ ]] Unix hardware collector. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[ ------------------------------ From: Warner Losh Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 19:52:38 -0700 Subject: Re: IBM 57SLC In message <199611220218.MAA16607@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Michael Smith writes: : FreeBSD does not currently support Microchannel. If you need a Unix : to run on that system, you may be able to get a PS/2 AIX to work. There is also a Linux microchannel port, but I know not its stability or where to find it. : For FreeBSD, PCI is the bus of choice; EISA and ISA also work well. VLB works too! Gotta get me some more modern hardware... Warner ------------------------------ From: Steve Price Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 21:56:36 -0600 Subject: Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Richard Wackerbarth wrote: > > <<< No Message Collected >>> Anybody have any idea why I have gotten about 20 of these in the last couple of hours? Is anybody else seeing this? Steve ------------------------------ From: FreeBSD Acct Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 23:37:55 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: Disk Striping On Fri, 22 Nov 1996, michael butler wrote: > > It is, however, quite valid to stripe any one activity, such as scribbling > out the articles across multiple drives. You could, for example, use two > striped drives for the history stuff, one for the overview (only if you have > any readers) and two striped for the article spool to achieve what you're > after. Even better, split the two striped arrangements onto two separate > (SCSI) controllers, Our news servers here, are P166's with 128Mb each, with two Adaptec3940 PCI cards. There are four 4Gig drives, each has its own separage SCSI controller as the 3940 has two controllers per card. The drives are identical, and in a CCD array. The pair of news servers boots from IDE..and swaps on the IDE as well. *Yes, I know, the IDE isnt that fast for swap* But its rarely more than 20Mb into it anyway under INN 1.5pre. Compared to how we had the news farm before..the CCD is many many times faster and more efficient. Special thanks to Rod Grimes for suggesting a 64k block size on the CCD...you'll have to ask him why..he understands those FS kinda things... Geoff ------------------------------ From: Amancio Hasty Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 22:07:09 -0800 Subject: Re: Pentium Pro status Well, PPRO + 440FX is incompatible with a few chipsets mostly because the 440fx is PCI 2.0 . For instance, a friend of mine had horrible crashes with a diamond stealth and his 440fx when he switch to a matrox millenium the problem went away. The matrox meteor is supposed to generate an illegal PCI signal which kills the PCI bus on PPRO with the 440fx chipset. Memory aperture for speeding up raw displays is now the responsibility of the OS and not the BIOS so to get maximum display bandwith the OS or X server needs to program the chipset to disable caching on a given memory display region. Amancio >From The Desk Of Snob Art Genre : > On Thu, 21 Nov 1996, Steven Wallace wrote: > > > > > I wanted some input regarding Pentium Pro machines. > > Has anyone had any problems with the hardware and/or using it with > > FreeBSD? > > > > Are there any problems with the PP chipset(is the latest Orion II or someth ing?) > > I remember hearing about PCI problems with the chipset. Someone > > told me they still have problems in orion II. Is this true? > > > > What motherboards for Pentium Pro are good and reliable? > > > > What about multiprocessor support? Does anyone have FreeBSD hacks to > > support multiple processors? How well is it working? > > > > Thank you, > > > > Steven Wallace > > I'm using a PPro-200 with the 440FX chipset, I don't remember its > nickname. I've had no problems with it at all. > > > > Ben > > ------------------------------ From: Amancio Hasty Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 22:36:31 -0800 Subject: Re: Pentium Pro status >From The Desk Of "Jin Guojun[ITG]" : > Pentinum. > Some more performance comparsion willbe found on: > > ftp://george.lbl.gov/pub/ccs/performance.ps (p6-7 for P<-->PP). > It will be updated whenever the new board/machines come in. Do you mind upgrading your P6 to FreeBSD-2.2 and then running the benchmarks. Tnks, Amancio ------------------------------ From: michael butler Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 18:29:54 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: Disk Striping > Our news servers here, are P166's with 128Mb each, with two Adaptec3940 > PCI cards. > There are four 4Gig drives, each has its own separage SCSI controller as > the 3940 has two controllers per card. > The drives are identical, and in a CCD array. [ .. ] > Compared to how we had the news farm before..the CCD is many many times > faster and more efficient. With no readers (and therefore no need for .overview files all over the place to mess things up), this combo will *scream* along quite happily at better than 10 articles a second iff the accesses for history and articles are on separate CCD arrays on separate channels. Short of getting "async" mode to work properly, there's not much better. The general principle is .. Seeks cost a lot, which can be relieved by configuring drives (amalgamated or not) to operate on only one part of the data set (history or articles but not both). Rotational latency costs less and can be divided by distributing across N drives in a CCD array, michael ------------------------------ From: sos@FreeBSD.org Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 09:13:44 +0100 (MET) Subject: Re: Who needs Perl? We do! In reply to Michael Smith who wrote: > > Nate Williams stands accused of saying: > > > > > > That's all well and good, but it presents a chicken-and-egg situation > > > for anyone trying to work outside the decades-old BSD model. You may > > > not consider this a problem; I do. Opinions differ. > > > > Yes, but anyone capable of developing a 'cool tool' with TCL that we > > can't live w/out is capable of installing a port, and *then* showing me > > how wonderful it is to justify bringing in TCL as part of the base > > system. > > > > Put the cart *before* the horse. > > Chicken->egg, egg->chicken? I can say that I wouldn't have undertaken > what I have if Tcl wasn't a part of the standard system - too many people > would say "but it needs Tcl, and I don't want to install that because ...". Because they dont have the space ?? :) > I figure that once it is clear that Perl is intended to be a part of the > base system, and that it's a stable item not going anywhere, people > should pick up and start using it. > > And the ultimate comeback is; if I'm wrong, and after 12 months nothing > has made use of it and everybody hates it, it can go away again. At > that point, there can be (even though there would be 8) no argument. THAT has proven almost NEVER to happen :( it will stay and rot in a corner if that happens. What is really scaring is the sheer size of our repository, half a year ago I could have the whole CVS tree plus all CTM patches and and obj tree on one 500M disk, now only the CVS tree fits there, no CTM patches, no obj tree. All this **** and we haven gotten any significant new functionality :( With this current trend, we'll all be so busy putting in/maintaining all those *cool tools*, that no real work will be done, and stagnation on that part is not exactly what we need. I still vote for ripping out the old (rottet) perl, and TCL, and then put it in ports where it belongs. I anybody does a multo graeto tool they want us to use, they can easily get it to install those tools from ports during thier own install, no excuse there either. Or we should invent a system (which could be based on the current contrib system), where its selectable if you want those tools and the utils that *might* depend on them. This solution I could live with, and I'm sure many of the other "purists"... - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Soren Schmidt (sos@FreeBSD.org) FreeBSD Core Team So much code to hack -- so little time. ------------------------------ From: Darius Moos Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 09:30:19 -0100 Subject: Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Sure ... but i tried to compile Perl-5.002 with "-DUNEXEC" so the "dump