headers
Joel Rees | 2 Jun 2003 07:01
Picon

could negative free be due to lack of FPU?

Performa 550, sans FPU
20M RAM
netbsd 1.6 (from a Japanese semi-periodical I picked up in January.)
2G HD with the bottom 1G formatted for netBSD (using the mkfs Mac-side app): 
    65M for root (/dev/sd1a)
    90M for swap (/dev/sd1b)
    700M for /usr (/dev/sd1g)
    63M for /var (/dev/sd1d)
    63M for /tmp (/dev/sd1e)
    60M for /home (/dev/sd1f)

labelled and installed using the Mac side pdisk and installer.

/var, /tmp, and /home get negative free reported from df. du reports
about 160K for /var, 16K for /tmp, and 8K for /home.

Tried umount and newfs on /home, no help. 

So I'm wondering, might this be due to the lack of FPU? Or should I
expect disk problems even if I dig up an FPU somewhere?

If there's not enough information here, I'll try again this Saturday,
boot with a serial console, and post the session capture to the list.

(I could also try the in-memory kernel method and post the errors that
produces. It wouldn't proceed after the disklabel part of the install
script.)

--

-- 
Joel Rees <joel <at> alpsgiken.gr.jp>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Riccardo Mottola | 2 Jun 2003 12:39
Picon
Favicon

Re: could negative free be due to lack of FPU?

on 6/2/03 7:01 AM, Joel Rees at joel <at> alpsgiken.gr.jp wrote:

> /var, /tmp, and /home get negative free reported from df. du reports
> about 160K for /var, 16K for /tmp, and 8K for /home.

there is some "spare" space after 100% so if you reach 100% you can cahe
some room before the machine locks up, thi sis why you see that.

I am sure it has been discussed before and you should find more complete
answers than mine looking around.

-ric
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Bruce Anderson | 2 Jun 2003 17:34

Re: could negative free be due to lack of FPU?

I don't thing this is a FPU issue, see:

<http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-mac68k/2001/01/12/0007.html>
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
olof hennig | 2 Jun 2003 18:05
Picon

Cabletron ethernet and 1.6.1

Hi!

John Klos wrote a long time ago:
---
 > The link you gave me:
 > http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-mac68k/2001/02/24/0005.html on how 
to
 > complile my own kernel doesn't work any more, however.

This was just fixed; the mail archive is now running off of the main
NetBSD www server.

I've looked at that post, and I will try to figure out how to make the
code automatically use the right values when it finds a Cabletron card.
---

Since I just "killed" my SE/30 by plugging in a faulty (didn't know 
that then) external scsi-disk I may be looking forward to a complete 
reinstall, though I hope I can fix it before it goes that far. Anyway I 
wonder if netbsd 1.6.1 can automatically detect the cabletron card 
nowdays. If so I'll upgrade, otherwise I'll just stick to 1.5.3 since 
compiling takes forever on my machine -- or does anyone know if it's 
possible to cross compile in macos x?

olof
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Bruce Anderson | 2 Jun 2003 18:10

Re: could negative free be due to lack of FPU?

On Mon, Jun 2, 2003 10:34 AM, Bruce Anderson
<mailto:brucea <at> shell.spacestar.net> wrote:
>I don't thing this is a FPU issue, see:
s/thing/think/

>
><http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-mac68k/2001/01/12/0007.html>
>

BA-
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Joel Rees | 3 Jun 2003 07:38
Picon

Re: could negative free be due to lack of FPU?

I don't thing this is a FPU issue, see:

<http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-mac68k/2001/01/12/0007.html>

Well, thanks. I had read that and noted that it was from 2001. I noted
that it recommends repartitioning and re-installing using the current
tools. What I have is the tools that came with the netBSD 1.6
distribution, I assume that those should be current enough?

I have tried repartitioning and re-installing already, I suppose I
should have mentioned that.

Is it likely that the bug from January 2001 has been re-introduced or
something? I'm not getting any more recent positives on this from marc
or google.

--

-- 
Joel Rees <joel <at> alpsgiken.gr.jp>
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Jason Thorpe | 3 Jun 2003 08:02

Re: could negative free be due to lack of FPU?


On Monday, June 2, 2003, at 10:38  PM, Joel Rees wrote:

> <http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-mac68k/2001/01/12/0007.html>

...

> Is it likely that the bug from January 2001 has been re-introduced or
> something? I'm not getting any more recent positives on this from marc
> or google.

I don't understand... there is no bug here.

The description of what is happening in the URL you cite is slightly 
wrong.  Yes, there is %5 that is reserved for the superuser, but "100%" 
is adjusted to compensate.  This means that the actual "all space used" 
value is "105%".

Unix has done this for a .. very long time.

         -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej <at> wasabisystems.com>
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Joel Rees | 3 Jun 2003 08:32
Picon

Re: could negative free be due to lack of FPU?

> 
> On Monday, June 2, 2003, at 10:38  PM, Joel Rees wrote:
> 
> > <http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-mac68k/2001/01/12/0007.html>
> 
> ...
> 
> > Is it likely that the bug from January 2001 has been re-introduced or
> > something? I'm not getting any more recent positives on this from marc
> > or google.
> 
> I don't understand... there is no bug here.

Was the incorrect initialization in the response then a user error?

If so, then I've made the same error three times, and it would be nice
if someone would hit me over the head with a clue-by-four so I can avoid
doing it a fourth time. Installs on mac68k keep my wife awake. :-/

As I said in my first post, 

    http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-mac68k/2003/06/02/0000.html

(which was trimmed) this is on a fresh install on a performa 550 w/out
FPU, the three partitions that show the negative free space start above
700M in a 2G HD, all are 60M+, and none have more than 200K in use. 

(And I apologize that I hit "paste without quoting" on my reply.)

> The description of what is happening in the URL you cite is slightly
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Gerardo Alvarez | 3 Jun 2003 09:26
Picon

Re: Things to do before the list slowly fades

Ok.
What worries me is wether I am capable of deciding what goes onto the 
revamped page and what not.
SOmetimes different oppinios arise but no clear conclussions seems to 
show up.
I would suggest picking up a list of threads that have been discussed 
and don´t show up on the page.
Also, links to sites that have custom kernels, etc.
Suggestions needed, rather than welcome.

El Viernes, 30 mayo, 2003, a las 06:31 PM, Allen Briggs escribió:

> On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 10:21:03AM -0500, Dan Willson wrote:
>> This sounds like fun
>
> Great!  And it sounds like you have some helpful skills and experience,
> too!  I think you guys should definitely work on it.  There's a lot 
> that
> can be done.
>
> You should try to talk with Colin Wood, who has maintained the FAQ and
> information in the past.  I'm sure he'd be happy to work with you guys
> to get it up to date.  I've copied him on this mail, too.
>
> Cheers,
> -allen
>
> -- 
>                   Use NetBSD!  http://www.netbsd.org/
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Bruce ONeel | 3 Jun 2003 10:59
Picon
Favicon

Re: could negative free be due to lack of FPU?

Hi,

What happens when you put a file there?  What does df then
show?

say, 

dd if=/dev/zero  of=/blah/blah1 bs=1000000 count=1

cheers

bruce

Joel Rees <joel <at> alpsgiken.gr.jp> wrote:
> > 
> > On Monday, June 2, 2003, at 10:38  PM, Joel Rees wrote:
> > 
> > > <http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-mac68k/2001/01/12/0007.html>
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > Is it likely that the bug from January 2001 has been re-introduced or
> > > something? I'm not getting any more recent positives on this from marc
> > > or google.
> > 
> > I don't understand... there is no bug here.
> 
> Was the incorrect initialization in the response then a user error?
> 
> If so, then I've made the same error three times, and it would be nice
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 503 comments |

Gmane