freebsd-hackers-digest V5 #739
owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org
freebsd-hackers-digest Saturday, March 8 2003 Volume 05 : Number 739
In this issue:
Re: Realtek
seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
RE: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
Re: Realtek
Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
Re: Realtek
Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
Re: High CPU usage when forwarding packets
Are there any on-going projects on v4l porting?
Re: Realtek
Re: Realtek
Re: Realtek
Re: Realtek
Re: High CPU usage when forwarding packets
Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
Makefiles to modify for adding new sys/*.h header files?
#warning must be protected by #if __GNUC__ in headers?
Re: High CPU usage when forwarding packets
Re: Makefiles to modify for adding new sys/*.h header files?
Re: Makefiles to modify for adding new sys/*.h header files?
Re: #warning must be protected by #if __GNUC__ in headers?
Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
Re: ng_fec on 4.7-RELEASE-p6
Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 13:17:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Doug Ambrisko <ambr...@ambrisko.com>
Subject: Re: Realtek
Thierry Herbelot writes:
| Le Friday 07 March 2003 18:16, Doug Ambrisko a ?crit :
| > everything at once. This illustrated the HW issue with the new D-Link 4
| > port card since none of their "supported" drivers and OSes could get over
| > 20Mbs. We had 100FDX links to each client and a Gig link to the server.
| > FreeBSD could peak to 40Mbs if I recall right and we were told FreeBSD
| > must be broken even though it was faster then their supported OSes
| > (Windows < 1Mbs)! To be honest I did fix a bunch of bugs in the FreeBSD
| > driver.
| >
| [re-SNIP]
| >
| > Our bigger issue is bus performance on a 32bit/33Mhz bus with 3, 4-port
| > cards.
|
| and the avid reader asks : so, now, what NIC are you really using ? (I too
| have used with great pleasure quite a bunch of DLink-DFE-570), and I was
| leaning towards using the newer DFE-580 4-port on another project ...)
The DFE-580 is EOL. That is their solution to their less then optimal
card with no replacement coming according to our rep. We are using our
own custom board with the Realtek 8100L parts.
| any suggestions (with benchmark results ?) heartily welcome !
I need to find them however, you need to benchmark in your environment
since CPU load etc can effect things.
PHK found a 4 port fxp card that was priced pretty good. I don't know
how successful he has with them.
Doug A.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 16:55:17 -0500
From: Brian Reichert <reic...@numachi.com>
Subject: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
I apologize for the odd subject line, and will fill in some details:
I'm exploring tweaks to various ports, for my private use. Some
of these tweaks can't be addressed via pkgtools.conf or abuse of
environment variables, and instead required actual modifications
to files.
I maintain a local CVS repository of FreeBSD via CVSup.
I regularly update my packages via the classic 'cvs co ports;
portupgrade --package --all'.
What I want is to somehow preserve my local tweaks, such that they
get reapplied to my working copy upon a checkout.
Tracking these tweaks via CVS _seems_ to be the way to go, but
apparently I'm not as sophisticated a CVS admin as I thought, and
can't seem to stumble on the right combinations of tools/practices
to do what I want.
So, does anyone have any concrete examples of how I can accomplish
this, or at least provide some magic terminology, such that I can
better pursue web research?
(Or, suggest a better forum to pitch this question?)
Thanks for any input...
- --
Brian 'you Bastard' Reichert <reic...@numachi.com>
37 Crystal Ave. #303 Daytime number: (603) 434-6842
Derry NH 03038-1713 USA BSD admin/developer at large
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 16:58:03 -0500
From: Don Bowman <d...@sandvine.com>
Subject: RE: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
> From: Brian Reichert [mailto:reic...@numachi.com]
...
> I maintain a local CVS repository of FreeBSD via CVSup.
...
http://www.scriptkiddie.org/freebsd/setting_up_local_repo.html
has the details you need. It entails an env var like:
CVS_LOCAL_BRANCH_NUM=1000
and changing the style of your cvsup.
- --don
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 09:19:06 +1100
From: Peter Jeremy <peter...@optushome.com.au>
Subject: Re: Realtek
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 10:43:37AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
>And TCP/IP headers are not an even multiple of the alignment boundary
>(4 bytes, actually). So every packet the card DMA's in has to be
>copied so that access to the TCP packet contents are aligned.
Last time I looked at TCP/IP, the header lengths were all defined
in 4-byte units so they must be a multiple of 4 bytes by definition.
Maybe you are referring to the Ethernet header - which is 14 bytes
long (18 bytes in a VLAN trunk).
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 14:18:20 -0800
From: Terry Lambert <tlam...@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
Brian Reichert wrote:
> I'm exploring tweaks to various ports, for my private use. Some
> of these tweaks can't be addressed via pkgtools.conf or abuse of
> environment variables, and instead required actual modifications
> to files.
[ ... ]
> What I want is to somehow preserve my local tweaks, such that they
> get reapplied to my working copy upon a checkout.
[ ... ]
> So, does anyone have any concrete examples of how I can accomplish
> this, or at least provide some magic terminology, such that I can
> better pursue web research?
This doesn't directly answer your question, but it does directly
address your problem...
Submit your tweaks back to the port maintainer.
If they are tweaks to the software the port represents, rather
than tweaks to the port, then submit them back to the original
author of the software in question, and they will come in through
the FreeBSD port that way.
I've actually spent a substantial amount of time, on various
occasions, going through the patches in the ports tree, and, as
long as they don't do something like break the ability of the
code to run on non-FreeBSD platforms, cleaned the patches up and
submitted them back to the original vendors. Mostly things that
don't require a big pipe to download before I can do the work.
For example, I've submitted a number of patches to "bind", "MySQL",
and so on, this way.
I like to do this, because I like to see code compile and run on
FreeBSD "out of the box", without having to be filtered through
the ports system. If you are building an embedded product, and
want to use software for which a port, with patches, exists, then
it really sucks to use the port, because you need to include a
copy of the software in your local repository, and that's pretty
immiscible with the way the ports system works. Sending patches
back so that ports are as "vanilla" as possible lets me keep my
options open that way.
- -- Terry
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 14:21:45 -0800
From: Terry Lambert <tlam...@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Realtek
Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 10:43:37AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> >And TCP/IP headers are not an even multiple of the alignment boundary
> >(4 bytes, actually). So every packet the card DMA's in has to be
> >copied so that access to the TCP packet contents are aligned.
>
> Last time I looked at TCP/IP, the header lengths were all defined
> in 4-byte units so they must be a multiple of 4 bytes by definition.
> Maybe you are referring to the Ethernet header - which is 14 bytes
> long (18 bytes in a VLAN trunk).
Yes. Unless the transfer is padded by the card in the DMA, or it
can DMA to a two-byte shifted boundary from it's own start address,
you end up having to copy to gt the TCP/IP headers onto a 4 byte
alignment boundary.
There are a couple other cards that suck this way; if Bill Paul
wrote the driver for the card, then the information is in the
comments in the driver. Generally, reading the comments in all
the drivers, and picking the one with the least disparaging
remarks is a good way to pick hardware. 8-).
- -- Terry
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 17:36:47 -0500
From: Brian Reichert <reic...@numachi.com>
Subject: Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:18:20PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> This doesn't directly answer your question, but it does directly
> address your problem...
Er, nope. Nice try:
> Submit your tweaks back to the port maintainer.
Um, some of these tweaks are _not_ going to be accepted, such as
commenting out 'NO_PACKAGE' out of a makefile.
The rest of your suggestions are quite sound, and would be employed
by me once I feel my changes are ready for prime-time...
>
> -- Terry
>
- --
Brian 'you Bastard' Reichert <reic...@numachi.com>
37 Crystal Ave. #303 Daytime number: (603) 434-6842
Derry NH 03038-1713 USA BSD admin/developer at large
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 17:39:17 -0500
From: Brian Reichert <reic...@numachi.com>
Subject: Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 04:58:03PM -0500, Don Bowman wrote:
> > From: Brian Reichert [mailto:reic...@numachi.com]
> ...
> > I maintain a local CVS repository of FreeBSD via CVSup.
> ...
>
> http://www.scriptkiddie.org/freebsd/setting_up_local_repo.html
>
> has the details you need. It entails an env var like:
> CVS_LOCAL_BRANCH_NUM=1000
>
> and changing the style of your cvsup.
Excellent! Seems quite to-the-point. Lemme see if I can make it
sing...
>
> --don
>
- --
Brian 'you Bastard' Reichert <reic...@numachi.com>
37 Crystal Ave. #303 Daytime number: (603) 434-6842
Derry NH 03038-1713 USA BSD admin/developer at large
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 00:56:19 +0200
From: Giorgos Keramidas <kera...@ceid.upatras.gr>
Subject: Re: High CPU usage when forwarding packets
On 2003-03-07 10:58, Terry Lambert <tlam...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Bruce Cran wrote:
>> Also, I'm getting several thousand 'lnc0: Missed packet -- no
>> receive buffer' messages. Could this be the problem, or is the
>> system just not powerful enough do nat? The sis0 card is 100MBit
>> PCI, while the lcn0 is 10MBit ISA.
>
> The "no receive buffers available" message happens when the
> system runs out of mbufs.
>
> There are a lot of reasons this could happen, but the proximal
> cause is you didn't tune the number NMBCLUSTERS, et. al. high
> enough. You should try rebuilding your kernel with a larger
> number.
Aren't the following two tunable from the loader too?
giorgos@gothmog[00:53]/home/giorgos$ sysctl -a | grep nmb[cu][fl]
kern.ipc.nmbclusters: 17216
kern.ipc.nmbufs: 34432
Just wondering, since I haven't had today a reasonn to reboot yet.
- - Giorgos
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 02:11:17 +0200 (EET)
From: Vladimir Kushnir <vkus...@alfacom.net>
Subject: Are there any on-going projects on v4l porting?
Hello all,
As subj. said - does anybody work on porting v4l & (especially!)
drivers for non- bt8x based cards? Specifically saa7134 based (got one and
would rather not have to reboot to Linux to watch TV :-)
Yes, I know, the simplest answer would be "you're interested - you do" but
that'd be quite beyond my skills. Still I'd happily help with
testing/debugging/whatever else.
Regards,
Vladimir
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 21:33:55 -0800
From: Wes Peters <w...@softweyr.com>
Subject: Re: Realtek
On Friday 07 March 2003 09:16, Doug Ambrisko wrote:
> Wes Peters writes:
> | On Thursday 06 March 2003 15:02, Paulo Roberto wrote:
> | > --- Bram Van Dam <ganda...@pandora.be> wrote:
> | > > cheap they are they do their job fairly well. If performance
> | > > isn't an issue then go for it.
> | >
> | > I couldn't agree more. If you are just staying in 55 mph, you don't
> | > need a Ferrari.
> |
> | It's not a ford vs. ferrari problem, it's that the ford only has
> | first gear, so you're doing 45 mph at redline and in grave danger of
> | blowing the heads off continuously.
> |
> | The problem with the RealTek chipset is that the packets have to be
> | aligned on some completely stupid boundary in memory (32 bytes if
> | memory serves). The driver code ends up copying the packet data to a
> | tempory buffer before sending it for almost every outgoing packet,
> | which is just totally stupid.
>
> [snip]
>
> | JUST SAY NO.
>
> Actually, test and the pick the fastest tends to be better.
>
> Since D-Link dropped their good 4-port card for a broken one which they
> discontinued we had to scramble for a solution. Our test bed was a
> basically a "server" machine tied to a "router/bridge" like thing with
> 4 clients. We'd run tests all to the server, all to the clients and
> everything at once. This illustrated the HW issue with the new D-Link
> 4 port card since none of their "supported" drivers and OSes could get
> over 20Mbs. We had 100FDX links to each client and a Gig link to the
> server. FreeBSD could peak to 40Mbs if I recall right and we were told
> FreeBSD must be broken even though it was faster then their supported
> OSes (Windows < 1Mbs)! To be honest I did fix a bunch of bugs in the
> FreeBSD driver.
>
> Using this framework we had a bridge riser card that we could plug
> 4 various PCI ethernet cards. We tested the dc(4), fxp(4), rl(4),
> sis(4) cards of various types and with our motherboard and CPU the
> rl(4) 8139C chips where the fastest via netperf with a significant
> margin. I went into the test biased against Realtek but couldn't
> justify not using them after testing. Now we are using the 8100L chip
> so we have a pretty simple design.
You did something truly bizarre. I've tested similar cards on many
machines ranging from K6-2 400MHz to P4 2.4GHz and the RealTek
performance has always been at or near the bottom of the heap. On the
slower processors, the overhead of aligning packets shows heavily, but it
can be noticed on any system.
A number of the chips folded into the dc(4) driver are horrible and
perform right down there with the RealTek, but a few are fairly good.
The 3com 3c905s are generally quite good using the xl(4) driver, as are
the Intel EEPro's using fxp. I've read of others struggling with both
but never encountered this myself. I tend to be quite conservative about
throwing random versions of FreeBSD at systems, though, and many of those
complaints come from people at various points on -stable, rather than a
known release point.
> So I'd say given a sufficiently fast CPU and memory the Realteks work
> pretty darn good.
For a sufficient engine RPM, that escort will do 85 MPH in first gear,
too. ;^)
> The speed win could be do to a slightly better
> bus interface. That was the problem with the newer D-Link 4 port card
> in that during RX the chip would take over the PCI bus for a loooong
> time.
Yup, they're complicated beasts. For someone who is not going to work on
the drivers themselves but wants performance, I suspect buying whatever
you can get in bulk for eight dollars is not an optimal strategy.
> A sufficiently fast CPU in our case is 700Mhz Celeron which is a lot
> different then pushing 100Mbs with a P5 133Mhz.
>
> Our bigger issue is bus performance on a 32bit/33Mhz bus with 3, 4-port
> cards.
>
> To date we haven't had any trouble with them and we've shipped a bunch.
Give me 1 second and I can easily bring any of your systems to their
knees, regardless of which cards you have installed. Everything is
relative. Were you watching the system load while performing your
testing? Was the cpu doing anything but routing? Is it required to for
your application? These and many others are all important questions, and
tend to have different answers for every application. For a desktop
workstation with undemanding network application requirements (email, web
browsing, occasional software updates) RealTek or any other card that
successfully attach to the network and correctly autonegotiate with your
hub (shudder) or switch is fine. Even a RealTek. ;^)
- --
Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?
Wes Peters w...@softweyr.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 21:37:07 -0800
From: Wes Peters <w...@softweyr.com>
Subject: Re: Realtek
On Friday 07 March 2003 13:17, Doug Ambrisko wrote:
> Thierry Herbelot writes:
> |
> | and the avid reader asks : so, now, what NIC are you really using ?
> | (I too have used with great pleasure quite a bunch of DLink-DFE-570),
> | and I was leaning towards using the newer DFE-580 4-port on another
> | project ...)
>
> PHK found a 4 port fxp card that was priced pretty good. I don't know
> how successful he has with them.
We're using a 2-port EEPro with 82551 chips with the two ports connected
with relays and a watchdog; we get excellent throughput in our testing so
far. I don't recall the vendor, it is "Ad-something." I can look them
up Monday if you email me about it then. I think they make a 4-port 551
card without the relays as well, but I don't know about pricing.
- --
Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?
Wes Peters w...@softweyr.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 15:49:05 -0600
From: "Brandon D. Valentine" <bra...@dvalentine.com>
Subject: Re: Realtek
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 01:17:50PM -0800, Doug Ambrisko wrote:
>
> The DFE-580 is EOL. That is their solution to their less then optimal
> card with no replacement coming according to our rep. We are using our
> own custom board with the Realtek 8100L parts.
>
> | any suggestions (with benchmark results ?) heartily welcome !
>
> I need to find them however, you need to benchmark in your environment
> since CPU load etc can effect things.
>
> PHK found a 4 port fxp card that was priced pretty good. I don't know
> how successful he has with them.
I have had good luck with the Adaptec Quartet 66 cards, under both Linux
and FreeBSD. YMMV, though. They come as 64-bit/66Mhz cards, which
definitely keeps the 4 pipes full (though they will also work on a
64-bit/33Mhz bus). They work great with Cisco FEC too. The card has a
PCI-to-PCI bridge onboard with four Starfire controllers hanging off of
the end of it. If you look around you can get them reasonably cheap. I
think I paid around $300 for the last one I bought after doing some
thorough pricewatch scouring. It's a bit pricier than you'll pay for
say a D-Link card or something but it's also got higher quality ethernet
controllers on it. Chances are if you really need a four-port card $300
is not that much to throw at it.
HTH,
Brandon D. Valentine
- --
bra...@dvalentine.com http://www.geekpunk.net
Pseudo-Random Googlism: brandon is something special as an institution
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 02:55:50 -0800
From: Luigi Rizzo <ri...@icir.org>
Subject: Re: Realtek
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 03:49:05PM -0600, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
...
> I have had good luck with the Adaptec Quartet 66 cards, under both Linux
> and FreeBSD. YMMV, though. They come as 64-bit/66Mhz cards, which
...
> controllers on it. Chances are if you really need a four-port card $300
> is not that much to throw at it.
At this price level, you can also consider the Intel PRO1000/MT
(part number is PWLA8492MT) which has two Gig-E ports (copper), is
well supported under FreeBSD by the Intel-supported "em" driver,
and costs $174 (list price, if you shop eg. on yahoo you can find
it cheaper than that).
The good thing of this cart is that it works at Gig speed, and
it is widely available so hopefully it won't disappear from
the market by the time you place your order.
cheers
luigi
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 13:08:10 +0000
From: Bruce Cran <br...@cran.org.uk>
Subject: Re: High CPU usage when forwarding packets
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 10:58:23AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Bruce Cran wrote:
> > Also, I'm getting
> > several thousand 'lnc0: Missed packet -- no receive buffer' messages.
> > Could this be the problem, or is the system just not powerful enough do
> > nat? The sis0 card is 100MBit PCI, while the lcn0 is 10MBit ISA.
>
> The "no receive buffers available" message happens when the
> system runs out of mbufs.
>
> There are a lot of reasons this could happen, but the proximal
> cause is you didn't tune the number NMBCLUSTERS, et. al. high
> enough. You should try rebuilding your kernel with a larger
> number.
>
> If the problem still happens, you need to do a "netstat -a > x",
> and then look for large numbers in the "Recv-Q" and "Send-Q"
> columns, and then figure out what's causing them.
>
Thanks, I added kern.ipc.nmbclusters=8192 to /boot/loader.conf and the
messages have stopped. I have also learnt that the high CPU usage is
simply because I'm trying to push 600KB/sec over an ISA bus, and lots
of copying is going on. I'd like to get a PCI card and stop using the
onboard lnc, but unfortunately the single PCI slot is already taken up
by other other NIC.
Bruce Cran
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 17:03:31 +0200
From: Peter Pentchev <ro...@ringlet.net>
Subject: Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
- --7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 05:36:47PM -0500, Brian Reichert wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:18:20PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > This doesn't directly answer your question, but it does directly
> > address your problem...
>=20
> Er, nope. Nice try:
>=20
> > Submit your tweaks back to the port maintainer.
>=20
> Um, some of these tweaks are _not_ going to be accepted, such as
> commenting out 'NO_PACKAGE' out of a makefile.
Treating the symptom rather than the problem, but NO_PACKAGE is easily
overridden by setting the FORCE_PACKAGE environment variable. Hm, I
just found out that this is not documented in the comments at the top of
bsd.port.mk...
As for treating the actual problem, CVS_LOCAL_BRANCH_NUM should
generally fit your needs.
G'luck,
Peter
- --=20
Peter Pentchev ro...@ringlet.net ro...@sbnd.net ro...@FreeBSD.org
PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc
Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553
I had to translate this sentence into English because I could not read the =
original Sanskrit.
- --7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQE+agZD7Ri2jRYZRVMRAg8FAJwIGfbn+lowKWOyvLOhXFHelMW1+wCglSHy
mbNCNutzskr5SnkhNBUDpIQ=
=TtFd
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- --7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH--
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 11:05:16 -0500
From: Craig Rodrigues <rod...@attbi.com>
Subject: Makefiles to modify for adding new sys/*.h header files?
Hi,
If I add new headers file in the directories /usr/src/sys/sys
and /usr/src/sys/{arch}/include, then which Makefiles do I need
to modify in order to make sure that my new header files
get installed properly when I do a make installworld?
Thanks.
- --
Craig Rodrigues
http://home.attbi.com/~rodrigc
rod...@attbi.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 11:19:43 -0500
From: Craig Rodrigues <rod...@attbi.com>
Subject: #warning must be protected by #if __GNUC__ in headers?
Hi,
In <sys/syslimits.h>, I see:
#if __GNUC__
#warning "No user-serviceable parts inside."
#endif
Does the use of #warning need to be protected by
#if __GNUC__ in FreeBSD header files? I am working
on something similar for <machine/limits.h>.
Some other header files check for __GNUC__ before using #warning,
such as <sys/ioctl.h>, but <sys/dkstat.h> does not.
Thanks.
- --
Craig Rodrigues
http://home.attbi.com/~rodrigc
rod...@attbi.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 09:34:00 -0800
From: Wes Peters <w...@softweyr.com>
Subject: Re: High CPU usage when forwarding packets
On Saturday 08 March 2003 05:08, Bruce Cran wrote:
>
> Thanks, I added kern.ipc.nmbclusters=8192 to /boot/loader.conf and the
> messages have stopped. I have also learnt that the high CPU usage is
> simply because I'm trying to push 600KB/sec over an ISA bus, and lots
> of copying is going on. I'd like to get a PCI card and stop using the
> onboard lnc, but unfortunately the single PCI slot is already taken up
> by other other NIC.
You need a PCI dual NIC, then. ISA network adapters suck, as you've
noted.
- --
Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?
Wes Peters w...@softweyr.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 10:20:17 -0800
From: Marcel Moolenaar <mar...@xcllnt.net>
Subject: Re: Makefiles to modify for adding new sys/*.h header files?
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 11:05:16AM -0500, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If I add new headers file in the directories /usr/src/sys/sys
> and /usr/src/sys/{arch}/include, then which Makefiles do I need
> to modify in order to make sure that my new header files
> get installed properly when I do a make installworld?
None.
- --
Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 mar...@xcllnt.net
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2003 19:23:08 +0100
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <p...@phk.freebsd.dk>
Subject: Re: Makefiles to modify for adding new sys/*.h header files?
In message <2003030818...@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>, Marcel Moolenaar writes
:
>On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 11:05:16AM -0500, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> If I add new headers file in the directories /usr/src/sys/sys
>> and /usr/src/sys/{arch}/include, then which Makefiles do I need
>> to modify in order to make sure that my new header files
>> get installed properly when I do a make installworld?
>
>None.
... which is a bug.
- --
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
p...@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 10:32:55 -0800
From: Marcel Moolenaar <mar...@xcllnt.net>
Subject: Re: #warning must be protected by #if __GNUC__ in headers?
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 11:19:43AM -0500, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In <sys/syslimits.h>, I see:
>
> #if __GNUC__
> #warning "No user-serviceable parts inside."
> #endif
>
>
> Does the use of #warning need to be protected by
> #if __GNUC__ in FreeBSD header files? I am working
> on something similar for <machine/limits.h>.
I think the use of #warning should be protected against abuse :-)
In general I probably would opt to not protect it with #if __GNUC__
because #warning is not specific to gcc and since we're only compiling
with gcc (officially) it's better to have it fail when somebody does
use a different compiler. I think the discussion that it will trigger
will yield a less gratuitous convention. Possibly documented. YMMV.
- --
Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 mar...@xcllnt.net
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 14:53:40 -0500
From: Brian Reichert <reic...@numachi.com>
Subject: Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
[Trimming Terry from the Cc: list]
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 05:03:31PM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 05:36:47PM -0500, Brian Reichert wrote:
> > Um, some of these tweaks are _not_ going to be accepted, such as
> > commenting out 'NO_PACKAGE' out of a makefile.
>
> Treating the symptom rather than the problem, but NO_PACKAGE is easily
> overridden by setting the FORCE_PACKAGE environment variable. Hm, I
> just found out that this is not documented in the comments at the top of
> bsd.port.mk...
Never heard of such a thing, and I would have been happy to make
use of it, for this once specific thing. Is there a ready example
of it's usage?
> As for treating the actual problem, CVS_LOCAL_BRANCH_NUM should
> generally fit your needs.
So I hope, I have yet to test-fire that setup. But, thanks for the
feedback...
> G'luck,
> Peter
- --
Brian 'you Bastard' Reichert <reic...@numachi.com>
37 Crystal Ave. #303 Daytime number: (603) 434-6842
Derry NH 03038-1713 USA BSD admin/developer at large
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 21:37:58 +0100
From: "Peter J. Blok" <pb...@inter.NL.net>
Subject: Re: ng_fec on 4.7-RELEASE-p6
Hi Attila,
Yes, I did ifconfig fxp[01] up. I didn't matter.
Julian reminded me a ng_fec is available in STABLE, which I'll try first. I
took the one out of Bill's directory.
Peter
On Thursday 06 March 2003 10:33, Attila Nagy wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > When I configure two fxp ports with the example load script, I'm getting
> > a message fxp0 up and fxp1 up, but fec0 doesn't work. I have assigned an
> > ip address and try to ping outside, but nothing happens. The moment I do
> > a tcpdump -i fec0, I see packets coming in and from that moment on the
> > fec0 bundle works, even when the tcpdump is stopped.
>
> Did you try ifconfig fxp0 up; ifconfig fxp1?
>
> ----------[ Free Software ISOs - http://www.fsn.hu/?f=download ]----------
> Attila Nagy e-mail: Attil...@fsn.hu
> Free Software Network (FSN.HU) phone @work: +361 210 1415 (194)
> cell.: +3630 306 6758
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 00:53:22 +0300 (MSK)
From: "."@babolo.ru
Subject: Re: seeking advice WRT maintaining private FreeBSD ports branch
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> > From: Brian Reichert [mailto:reic...@numachi.com]
> ...
> > I maintain a local CVS repository of FreeBSD via CVSup.
> ...
>
> http://www.scriptkiddie.org/freebsd/setting_up_local_repo.html
>
> has the details you need. It entails an env var like:
> CVS_LOCAL_BRANCH_NUM=1000
>
> and changing the style of your cvsup.
It works on the only local cvs repository.
With two repositories - for FreeBSD and
for local patches - it is not easy to mantain.
Need for this occur when a lot of
hosts need to be uniformly deviate
from the original.
I submitted PR ports/45200 for using
LOCAL_PATCHDIR in addition to PATCHDIR,
but it closed for false reason.
More exact patch can be extracted from
http://free.babolo.ru/patch/ports.Mk.port.mk.patch
------------------------------
End of freebsd-hackers-digest V5 #739
*************************************
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo...@FreeBSD.org
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers-digest in the body of the message