From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 00:03:12 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B2A516A402 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 00:03:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from benlutz@datacomm.ch) Received: from maxlor.mine.nu (c-213-160-32-54.customer.ggaweb.ch [213.160.32.54]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 736B043D46 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 00:03:11 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from benlutz@datacomm.ch) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB5252E0A6; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:03:09 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at atlantis.intranet Received: from maxlor.mine.nu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlantis.intranet [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sK--Q0luZpgh; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:03:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mini.intranet (mini.intranet [10.0.0.17]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61A3E2E01B; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:03:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Benjamin Lutz To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:03:01 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 References: <200604221511.k3MFBxa2003218@mist.nodomain> In-Reply-To: <200604221511.k3MFBxa2003218@mist.nodomain> X-Face: $Ov27?7*N,h60fIEfNJdb!m,@#4T/d; 1hw|W0zvsHM(a$Yn6BYQ0^SEEXvi8>D`|V*F"=?iso-8859-1?q?=5F+R=0A?= 2@Aq>+mNb4`,'[[%z9v0Fa~]AD1}xQO3|>b.z&}l#R-_(P`?@Mz"kS; XC>Eti,i3>%@g?4f,=?iso-8859-1?q?=5Cc7=7CGh=0A?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_wb=26ky=24b2PJ=5E=5C0b83NkLsFKv=7CsmL/cI4UD=25Tu8alAD?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1297295.LFSzQG6KxA"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200604230203.05209.benlutz@datacomm.ch> Cc: Dan Strick Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 00:03:12 -0000 --nextPart1297295.LFSzQG6KxA Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Saturday 22 April 2006 17:11, Dan Strick wrote: > On Friday 21 Apr 2006 09:20, Don Dugger wrote: > > The example above is not exactly a realworld example. Even if you stick > > to plain C, a repeated putchar(' ') is 1-2 orders of magnitude slower > > than aggregating those characters and write()'ing them every few dozen > > chars. > > This might seem obvious, but is it really true? I wrote a program that > tries it both ways with the output redirected to /dev/null and discovered > that filling a 24 character buffer and doing a write() takes about 11 tim= es > as much cpu time as 24 putchar()s. Perhaps a buffer larger than a "few > dozen chars" would be useful. There must be a moral here somewhere. :-) Yes, it is really true. Since I don't know what your test is, I've created = my=20 own. test_putchar.c:=20 =2D--- #include #include int main(int argc, char** argv) { int i, j; for (i =3D 0; i < 50000; i++) { for (j =3D 0; j < 60; j++) { putchar('.'); } putchar('\n'); } return 0; } =2D--- test_write.c: =2D--- #include #include int main(int argc, char** argv) { char buf[61]; int i, j; for (i =3D 0; i < 50000; i++) { for (j =3D 0; j < 60; j++) { buf[j] =3D '.'; } buf[60] =3D '\n'; write(STDOUT_FILENO, buf, 61); } return 0; } =2D--- And for completeness' sake, two corresponding C++ iostream variants: test_iostream.cpp: =2D--- #include using namespace std; int main(int argc, char** argv) { for (int i =3D 0; i < 50000; i++) { for (int j =3D 0; j < 60; j++) { cout << '.'; } cout << '\n'; } return 0; } =2D--- test_string.cpp =2D--- #include using namespace std; int main(int argc, char** argv) { for (int i =3D 0; i < 50000; i++) { for (int j =3D 0; j < 60; j++) { cout << '.'; } cout << '\n'; } return 0; } =2D--- All files are compiled with gcc/g++ and the -O2 option. I'm running them on= a=20 Mac Mini under Linux. And the results are (I've run that command several times and picked a line= =20 that shows an average run time): $ time ./test_putchar > /dev/null =2E/test_putchar > /dev/null 0.39s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 0.397 total $ time ./test_write > /dev/null =2E/test_write > /dev/null 0.02s user 0.01s system 82% cpu 0.029 total $ time ./test_iostream > /dev/null =2E/test_iostream > /dev/null 0.94s user 0.00s system 99% cpu 0.950 total $ time ./test_string > /dev/null =2E/test_string > /dev/null 0.21s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 0.213 total That quite clearly shows that my prediction that using putchar is "1-2 orde= rs=20 of magnitude slower" is accurate. It also shows the points you and others=20 have made that iostream is slower than C's I/O mechanisms. If we take the two most sensible variants, test_write and test_iostream, an= d=20 have them write into a file, we get these numbers: $ time ./test_write > foo =2E/test_write > foo 0.01s user 0.16s system 95% cpu 0.180 total $ time ./test_string > foo =2E/test_string > foo 0.20s user 0.02s system 98% cpu 0.223 total Which is a small enough difference to be irrelevant. The large I/O performa= nce=20 advantage of the write(2) variant over the C++ string variant vanishes as=20 soon as the code actually does something remotely useful. > I am not claiming that strings and iostreams are bad. I am observing > that some reasonable programs that use these facilities will run very > slowly and I am suggesting that it is not always obvious which programs > these are. You mentioned a pretty printer. I'm not convinced that the performance=20 drawbacks you saw were inherent in iostream. Rather it seems that the comfo= rt=20 of C++'s strings and streams led the programmer to program in a less=20 performance-conscious way. > I am also expressing disappointment because I want the=20 > decision to use any feature of C++ or its standard library to be a > no-brainer. Personally, I don't hesitate to use features of C++. As for the STL... ther= e=20 are nice alternatives that are sometimes available. When writing Qt program= s,=20 I'll use Qt's data structures only, not the STL ones, since imo Qt's data=20 structure classes are more comfortable to use. Cheers Benjamin --nextPart1297295.LFSzQG6KxA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBESsQ5gShs4qbRdeQRAlIlAJ4hGnBtg4OiW8BpCuFWVI9ujIqW9ACeJ7wu l6InmUPeDNGdO6aiIz+V8yk= =pUhW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1297295.LFSzQG6KxA-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 00:30:30 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DA3316A401 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 00:30:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Received: from www.hotlz.com (freedom.hotlz.com [209.20.218.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B390743D48 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 00:30:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Received: from [172.27.240.45] (henry.local.hotlz.com [172.27.240.45]) by www.hotlz.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k3N0UKu4029573; Sat, 22 Apr 2006 17:30:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Message-ID: <444ACA9E.5060602@hotlz.com> Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 17:30:22 -0700 From: Don Dugger User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Macintosh/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org References: <200604221511.k3MFBxa2003218@mist.nodomain> <200604230203.05209.benlutz@datacomm.ch> In-Reply-To: <200604230203.05209.benlutz@datacomm.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Benjamin Lutz Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 00:30:30 -0000 Am I missing something here? What's the difference between test_iostream.cpp and test_string.cpp? Don 8) Benjamin Lutz wrote: >On Saturday 22 April 2006 17:11, Dan Strick wrote: > > >>On Friday 21 Apr 2006 09:20, Don Dugger wrote: >> >> >>>The example above is not exactly a realworld example. Even if you stick >>>to plain C, a repeated putchar(' ') is 1-2 orders of magnitude slower >>>than aggregating those characters and write()'ing them every few dozen >>>chars. >>> >>> >>This might seem obvious, but is it really true? I wrote a program that >>tries it both ways with the output redirected to /dev/null and discovered >>that filling a 24 character buffer and doing a write() takes about 11 times >>as much cpu time as 24 putchar()s. Perhaps a buffer larger than a "few >>dozen chars" would be useful. There must be a moral here somewhere. :-) >> >> > >Yes, it is really true. Since I don't know what your test is, I've created my >own. > >test_putchar.c: >---- >#include >#include >int main(int argc, char** argv) { > int i, j; > for (i = 0; i < 50000; i++) { > for (j = 0; j < 60; j++) { > putchar('.'); > } > putchar('\n'); > } > return 0; >} >---- > >test_write.c: >---- >#include >#include >int main(int argc, char** argv) { > char buf[61]; > int i, j; > for (i = 0; i < 50000; i++) { > for (j = 0; j < 60; j++) { > buf[j] = '.'; > } > buf[60] = '\n'; > write(STDOUT_FILENO, buf, 61); > } > return 0; >} >---- >And for completeness' sake, two corresponding C++ iostream variants: >test_iostream.cpp: >---- >#include >using namespace std; >int main(int argc, char** argv) { > for (int i = 0; i < 50000; i++) { > for (int j = 0; j < 60; j++) { > cout << '.'; > } > cout << '\n'; > } > return 0; >} >---- > >test_string.cpp >---- >#include >using namespace std; >int main(int argc, char** argv) { > for (int i = 0; i < 50000; i++) { > for (int j = 0; j < 60; j++) { > cout << '.'; > } > cout << '\n'; > } > return 0; >} >---- > >All files are compiled with gcc/g++ and the -O2 option. I'm running them on a >Mac Mini under Linux. > >And the results are (I've run that command several times and picked a line >that shows an average run time): > >$ time ./test_putchar > /dev/null >./test_putchar > /dev/null 0.39s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 0.397 total >$ time ./test_write > /dev/null >./test_write > /dev/null 0.02s user 0.01s system 82% cpu 0.029 total >$ time ./test_iostream > /dev/null >./test_iostream > /dev/null 0.94s user 0.00s system 99% cpu 0.950 total >$ time ./test_string > /dev/null >./test_string > /dev/null 0.21s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 0.213 total > > >That quite clearly shows that my prediction that using putchar is "1-2 orders >of magnitude slower" is accurate. It also shows the points you and others >have made that iostream is slower than C's I/O mechanisms. > >If we take the two most sensible variants, test_write and test_iostream, and >have them write into a file, we get these numbers: > >$ time ./test_write > foo >./test_write > foo 0.01s user 0.16s system 95% cpu 0.180 total >$ time ./test_string > foo >./test_string > foo 0.20s user 0.02s system 98% cpu 0.223 total > >Which is a small enough difference to be irrelevant. The large I/O performance >advantage of the write(2) variant over the C++ string variant vanishes as >soon as the code actually does something remotely useful. > > > >>I am not claiming that strings and iostreams are bad. I am observing >>that some reasonable programs that use these facilities will run very >>slowly and I am suggesting that it is not always obvious which programs >>these are. >> >> > >You mentioned a pretty printer. I'm not convinced that the performance >drawbacks you saw were inherent in iostream. Rather it seems that the comfort >of C++'s strings and streams led the programmer to program in a less >performance-conscious way. > > > >>I am also expressing disappointment because I want the >>decision to use any feature of C++ or its standard library to be a >>no-brainer. >> >> > >Personally, I don't hesitate to use features of C++. As for the STL... there >are nice alternatives that are sometimes available. When writing Qt programs, >I'll use Qt's data structures only, not the STL ones, since imo Qt's data >structure classes are more comfortable to use. > >Cheers >Benjamin > > From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 00:35:26 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78A0716A400 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 00:35:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from benlutz@datacomm.ch) Received: from maxlor.mine.nu (c-213-160-32-54.customer.ggaweb.ch [213.160.32.54]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9D4443D45 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 00:35:25 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from benlutz@datacomm.ch) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B69792E0A6; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:35:24 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at atlantis.intranet Received: from maxlor.mine.nu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlantis.intranet [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qGa9XbaLSACh; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:35:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mini.intranet (mini.intranet [10.0.0.17]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 862142E01B; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:35:24 +0200 (CEST) From: Benjamin Lutz To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:35:18 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 References: <200604221511.k3MFBxa2003218@mist.nodomain> <200604230203.05209.benlutz@datacomm.ch> <444ACA9E.5060602@hotlz.com> In-Reply-To: <444ACA9E.5060602@hotlz.com> X-Face: $Ov27?7*N,h60fIEfNJdb!m,@#4T/d; 1hw|W0zvsHM(a$Yn6BYQ0^SEEXvi8>D`|V*F"=?iso-8859-1?q?=5F+R=0A?= 2@Aq>+mNb4`,'[[%z9v0Fa~]AD1}xQO3|>b.z&}l#R-_(P`?@Mz"kS; XC>Eti,i3>%@g?4f,=?iso-8859-1?q?=5Cc7=7CGh=0A?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_wb=26ky=24b2PJ=5E=5C0b83NkLsFKv=7CsmL/cI4UD=25Tu8alAD?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1559741.3E7pTcsqPA"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200604230235.21572.benlutz@datacomm.ch> Cc: Don Dugger , Dan Strick Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 00:35:26 -0000 --nextPart1559741.3E7pTcsqPA Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Sunday 23 April 2006 02:30, Don Dugger wrote: > Am I missing something here? What's the difference between > test_iostream.cpp and test_string.cpp? Oh. Sorry about that. Here's the proper test_string.cpp: test_string.cpp ---- #include #include using namespace std; int main(int argc, char** argv) { string buf; for(int i = 0; i < 50000; i++) { buf.clear(); for (int j = 0; j < 60; j++) { buf.push_back('.'); } buf.push_back('\n'); cout << buf; } return 0; } ---- Cheers Benjamin --nextPart1559741.3E7pTcsqPA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBESsvJgShs4qbRdeQRAkahAJ9xiSKSVbHERlq/aODWaHudUN1X7QCffpOC dLdr1BLTh7IdXeClMKUTno8= =nfgG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1559741.3E7pTcsqPA-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 05:00:06 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DE8216A400 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 05:00:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (p65-147.acedsl.com [66.114.65.147]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71AAE43D46 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 05:00:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (localhost.natserv.net [127.0.0.1]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7EB1B849 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 01:00:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (zoraida.natserv.net [66.114.65.147]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81F9FB830 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 01:00:04 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: X-Mailer: http://www.courier-mta.org/cone/ From: Francisco Reyes To: FreeBSD Chat List Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 01:00:04 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Subject: Anyone ever tried experts-exchange for freebsd questions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 05:00:06 -0000 Was just looking at some of the questions people post on that service. However can't see the solutions.. anyone using that service or anything like it for FreeBSD? With enough time usually one can figure out most things.. and usually questions get answered in these lists.. however there are times one needs an answer.. and asking the lists have yielded nothing... so a service like that may help.. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 05:43:32 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04F9F16A404 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 05:43:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from darren.pilgrim@bitfreak.org) Received: from mail.bitfreak.org (mail.bitfreak.org [65.75.198.146]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD2C343D48 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 05:43:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from darren.pilgrim@bitfreak.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (mail.bitfreak.org [65.75.198.146]) by mail.bitfreak.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACED919F2C; Sat, 22 Apr 2006 22:43:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <444B13FF.3020808@bitfreak.org> Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 22:43:27 -0700 From: Darren Pilgrim User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Francisco Reyes References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Chat List Subject: Re: Anyone ever tried experts-exchange for freebsd questions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 05:43:32 -0000 Francisco Reyes wrote: > Was just looking at some of the questions people post on that service. > > However can't see the solutions.. anyone using that service or anything > like it for FreeBSD? Nope to both. The first because they don't offer a free demo period, so I can't verify their claims of exclusive knowledge without giving them money. The second because unlike certain other OSes, 99.99% of the documentation I need is either in Google's database or not in existence. In 8 years of using FreeBSD as a hobbyist and professional, I've only had one technical issue that was never resolved. Everything else has been answered to conclusion either on the mailing lists or through searches (now almost exclusively Google). In Linux and Windows, you need professional people and paid support services because there are massive proprietary layers built on top of the standard bits. The standard bits are documented, but support for the proprietary bits is a business model of most of the companies involved. It's not a bad thing outright, just not very nice to those with thin wallets. I also emmensely enjoy the thought that people who use Linux and Windows are often in need of professional help while I, being a FreeBSD user, am beyond help. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 06:50:52 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50F2016A402 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 06:50:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 113BA43D45 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 06:50:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7C151A3C2D; Sat, 22 Apr 2006 23:50:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0E4665553C; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:50:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:50:50 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: Francisco Reyes Message-ID: <20060423065050.GA35136@xor.obsecurity.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jRHKVT23PllUwdXP" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: FreeBSD Chat List Subject: Re: Anyone ever tried experts-exchange for freebsd questions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 06:50:52 -0000 --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 01:00:04AM -0400, Francisco Reyes wrote: > Was just looking at some of the questions people post on that service. >=20 > However can't see the solutions.. anyone using that service or anything= =20 > like it for FreeBSD? >=20 > With enough time usually one can figure out most things.. and usually=20 > questions get answered in these lists.. however there are times one needs= =20 > an answer.. and asking the lists have yielded nothing... so a service lik= e=20 > that may help.. Maybe it is not a good indication of their level of competency, but their website used to be expertsexchange.com, which turned out not to be so well thought out from a marketing perspective. Kris --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFESyPKWry0BWjoQKURAnXhAJ9G4chN8PcaQIpkaXlsYyhn/E7engCg48xf XSG8/TKtFk7GL3QbDPvOJ5Q= =Br8p -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 09:45:18 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE31C16A403 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 09:45:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dthomas53@gmail.com) Received: from pproxy.gmail.com (pproxy.gmail.com [64.233.166.179]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1812543D46 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 09:45:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dthomas53@gmail.com) Received: by pproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id t32so783304pyc for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:45:17 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=Dk1RsVNYkpl4BJQ/unD6YXNIlrekh+W3VCZ/V3lQRUbAn+/3dtVwYsT531qVo+d2GsBeIKvZzBfjnOOxu+UzWe3eO7/JzfXSdVlE35wj7zpLA1nq/JKpzyM0xWvAloWQlzJnhgWW4YkqqWZOrY1wYwg2uZdU5jC7DypNWBYufNM= Received: by 10.35.99.14 with SMTP id b14mr2639181pym; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:45:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.15.17 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 02:45:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 05:45:17 -0400 From: "David Stanford" To: "Francisco Reyes" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: FreeBSD Chat List Subject: Re: Anyone ever tried experts-exchange for freebsd questions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 09:45:18 -0000 I agree with Darren that you shouldn't need to sign up for experts-exchange= , as there are plenty of online resources available for FreeBSD. However, I d= o have an experts-exchange account and can tell you that, although I have onl= y needed to ask maybe four questions, you can usually get much quicker responses than other places on the web and there is also a fairly deep archive of previous posts to dig through while you wait for a replies - and they are usually of good quality. In either case, it's only $9.99 monthly and you can cancel at anytime. I suggest signing up the next time you have an urgent question that can't wait and just cancel the account if you feel it's not worth the cost. There is also http://bsdforums.org/...if you weren't already aware... -David On 4/23/06, Francisco Reyes wrote: > > Was just looking at some of the questions people post on that service. > > However can't see the solutions.. anyone using that service or anything > like > it for FreeBSD? > > With enough time usually one can figure out most things.. and usually > questions get answered in these lists.. however there are times one needs > an > answer.. and asking the lists have yielded nothing... so a service like > that > may help.. > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 12:17:58 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48FDD16A402 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:17:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FF3343D4C for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:17:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 039C02086; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:17:52 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Tests: AWL,BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Learn: ham X-Spam-Score: -2.4/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on tim.des.no Received: from xps.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by tim.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 766B62082; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:17:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: by xps.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 3C93733C31; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:17:51 +0200 (CEST) From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) To: Don Dugger References: <44490663.3040506@hotlz.com> <86d5f9pno8.fsf@xps.des.no> <444A652E.5010403@kanga.org> <864q0lplro.fsf@xps.des.no> <444A9DE6.4070203@hotlz.com> <86ejzpntn6.fsf@xps.des.no> <444AB293.40809@hotlz.com> Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 14:17:50 +0200 In-Reply-To: <444AB293.40809@hotlz.com> (Don Dugger's message of "Sat, 22 Apr 2006 15:47:47 -0700") Message-ID: <86acaco58x.fsf@xps.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:17:58 -0000 Don Dugger writes: > So if c++ isn't all that good it's ISO fault not ANSI? Why is this > so important to you. It isn't. Please try reading what I write. You might want to read up on C and C++ as well, and come back when you know a little bit more. > > He is Danish. Murray Hill, NJ is the location of AT&T Labs, where he > > works. > I know where AT&T *was*. was? AT&T and AT&T Labs are still very much alive. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 15:04:18 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF1B416A405 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:04:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (p65-147.acedsl.com [66.114.65.147]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 123E243D66 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:04:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (localhost.natserv.net [127.0.0.1]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1769CB84B; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:04:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (zoraida.natserv.net [66.114.65.147]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D295CB830; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:04:08 -0400 (EDT) References: <20060423065050.GA35136@xor.obsecurity.org> Message-ID: X-Mailer: http://www.courier-mta.org/cone/ From: Francisco Reyes To: Kris Kennaway Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:04:08 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Cc: FreeBSD Chat List Subject: Re: Anyone ever tried experts-exchange for freebsd questions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:04:19 -0000 Kris Kennaway writes: > Maybe it is not a good indication of their level of competency, but > their website used to be expertsexchange.com, which turned out not to > be so well thought out from a marketing perspective. Hehe.. that was dumb.. They way I understand these type of sites work is that people give advice, not any employees of the company or anyone under direct control of the company. An even better service would be one where the people that answer would get some money. That would be a good incentive for knowledgeable people to answer questions. Anyone know of such a service with a FreeBSD section? From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 15:14:59 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E97D516A400 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:14:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (p65-147.acedsl.com [66.114.65.147]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2697043D46 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:14:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (localhost.natserv.net [127.0.0.1]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 786B3B849; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:14:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (zoraida.natserv.net [66.114.65.147]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D6BFB830; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:14:58 -0400 (EDT) References: <444B13FF.3020808@bitfreak.org> Message-ID: X-Mailer: http://www.courier-mta.org/cone/ From: Francisco Reyes To: Darren Pilgrim Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:14:58 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Cc: FreeBSD Chat List Subject: Re: Anyone ever tried experts-exchange for freebsd questions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:15:00 -0000 Darren Pilgrim writes: > The second because unlike certain other OSes, 99.99% of the > documentation I need is either in Google's database or not in existence. Although I do find a large number of questions answered online, ever since I became a FreeBSD system admin July 05 I find myself in a different situation than in all previous time using open source. 1- The company I work for is willing to pay for a consultant if I recommend it. Likewise I am sure I could get the fee for services like experts-exchange paid by the company. 2- Although I actually bill the time I spend researching on issues, if I find a way to get something done faster and cheaper than spending time researching I talk to the boss and often times he agress to pay whoever can do the work quicker. > In 8 years of using FreeBSD as a hobbyist and professional, I've only > had one technical issue that was never resolved. Often times it is not if it will get resolved, but how long it will take and what projects will get delayed while you hunt down the solution to a particular problem. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 15:25:11 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97D6F16A420 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:25:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from strick@covad.net) Received: from mail842.megamailservers.com (mail842.carrierinternetsolutions.com [69.49.106.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 654CC43D6D for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:25:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from strick@covad.net) X-POP-User: strick.covad.net Received: from mist.nodomain (h-67-101-151-77.snfccasy.dynamic.covad.net [67.101.151.77]) by mail842.megamailservers.com (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k3NFP6wL004896 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:25:07 -0400 Received: from mist.nodomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mist.nodomain (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k3NFP6Rk003156; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:25:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dan@mist.nodomain) Received: (from dan@localhost) by mist.nodomain (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id k3NFP64X003155; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:25:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dan) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:25:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Dan Strick Message-Id: <200604231525.k3NFP64X003155@mist.nodomain> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Cc: dan@mist.nodomain Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:25:11 -0000 On Sunday 23 Apr 2006 02:03, Benjamin Lutz wrote: > On Saturday 22 April 2006 17:11, Dan Strick wrote: > > On Thursday 20 Apr 2006 22:58, Benjamin Lutz wrote: (this line corrected) > > > The example above is not exactly a realworld example. Even if you stick > > > to plain C, a repeated putchar(' ') is 1-2 orders of magnitude slower > > > than aggregating those characters and write()'ing them every few dozen > > > chars. > > > > This might seem obvious, but is it really true? I wrote a program that > > tries it both ways with the output redirected to /dev/null and discovered > > that filling a 24 character buffer and doing a write() takes about 11 times > > as much cpu time as 24 putchar()s. Perhaps a buffer larger than a "few > > dozen chars" would be useful. There must be a moral here somewhere. :-) > > > Yes, it is really true. Since I don't know what your test is, I've created > my own. > > ... > > All files are compiled with gcc/g++ and the -O2 option. I'm running them on > a Mac Mini under Linux. > > And the results are (I've run that command several times and picked a line > that shows an average run time): > > $ time ./test_putchar > /dev/null > ./test_putchar > /dev/null 0.39s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 0.397 total > $ time ./test_write > /dev/null > ./test_write > /dev/null 0.02s user 0.01s system 82% cpu 0.029 total > $ time ./test_iostream > /dev/null > ./test_iostream > /dev/null 0.94s user 0.00s system 99% cpu 0.950 total > $ time ./test_string > /dev/null > ./test_string > /dev/null 0.21s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 0.213 total > > > That quite clearly shows that my prediction that using putchar is "1-2 orders > of magnitude slower" is accurate. It also shows the points you and others > have made that iostream is slower than C's I/O mechanisms. > > If we take the two most sensible variants, test_write and test_iostream, and > have them write into a file, we get these numbers: > > $ time ./test_write > foo > ./test_write > foo 0.01s user 0.16s system 95% cpu 0.180 total > $ time ./test_string > foo > ./test_string > foo 0.20s user 0.02s system 98% cpu 0.223 total > > Which is a small enough difference to be irrelevant. The large I/O performance > advantage of the write(2) variant over the C++ string variant vanishes as > soon as the code actually does something remotely useful. > In order to make sure that we are comparing apples to apples and not to oranges, I copied Benjamin Lutz's test programs and ran them on my machine, a 2.8 GHz Intel P4 running FreeBSD 5.4. The repetition counts in the programs were increased from 50K to 500K and the programs were compiled with the -O2 option using whatever version of GNU gcc/g++ comes standard with FreeBSD 5.4. times for output to /dev/null: test_putchar: 0.140u 0.000s 0:00.14 100.0% 5+180k 0+0io 0pf+0w test_write: 0.163u 0.413s 0:00.57 100.0% 5+171k 0+0io 0pf+0w test_iostream: 3.673u 0.015s 0:03.69 99.7% 5+179k 0+0io 0pf+0w test_string: 0.789u 0.007s 0:00.79 98.7% 5+188k 0+0io 0pf+0w times for output to file foo: test_putchar: 0.145u 0.040s 0:01.82 9.8% 5+194k 0+232io 0pf+0w test_write: 0.133u 1.333s 0:01.84 79.3% 6+170k 0+232io 0pf+0w test_iostream: 3.635u 0.077s 0:03.73 99.1% 6+197k 0+232io 0pf+0w test_string: 0.772u 0.076s 0:01.84 45.6% 8+213k 0+232io 0pf+0w My results show something quite different. Even though the buffer size used by Benjamin's write() test (61 bytes) is much larger than the one I used (only 24 bytes), the write() test to /dev/null still takes about 4 times longer than the putchar() test. As one might expect, the write() test spends most of its time in the kernel doing all those write() system calls. The putchar() test (i.e. stdio) is probably using a 1K byte buffer. I cannot explain Benjamin's results on a Mac Mini running Linux. His write() test to /dev/null took almost no system time. Note that on his system the write() test to a real file consumed 16 times as much system time as the write() test to /dev/null (best guess since the precision of his time measurement was so limited). On my system the ratio was about 3 to one. His I/O system must be radically different from mine. Does anyone know why? What does Linux do differently than FreeBSD? I stand by my suggestion that using putchar() might not be slower. On my system it was much faster. I also note that while most of the tests writing to a real file used about the same real time, there were really huge differences in cpu time. Test_putchar was the big winner, running 4.5 times faster than test_string, 8 times faster than test_write, and 20 times faster than test_iostream. Such differences in cpu consumption can be important even when the processes are i/o bound because other processes running on the same system may be cpu bound. Dan Strick From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 15:39:46 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 744CC16A40A for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:39:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Received: from www.hotlz.com (freedom.hotlz.com [209.20.218.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 156DB43D48 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:39:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Received: from [172.27.240.45] (henry.local.hotlz.com [172.27.240.45]) by www.hotlz.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k3NFdWvk043157; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:39:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Message-ID: <444B9FB4.3000307@hotlz.com> Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:39:32 -0700 From: Don Dugger User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Macintosh/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org References: <200604231525.k3NFP64X003155@mist.nodomain> In-Reply-To: <200604231525.k3NFP64X003155@mist.nodomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Dan Strick Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:39:46 -0000 I think this points out another issues with performance. That some times the OS and the compilers implementation have more effect then the language. I have hard that argued to use native compiles on OSs like SUN and HP over GNU. The idea that the computer manufacture can implement the compile better then a third party. Am I read this right, the iostearms are really bad? Don 8) Dan Strick wrote: >On Sunday 23 Apr 2006 02:03, Benjamin Lutz wrote: > > >>On Saturday 22 April 2006 17:11, Dan Strick wrote: >> >> >>>On Thursday 20 Apr 2006 22:58, Benjamin Lutz wrote: (this line corrected) >>> >>> >>>>The example above is not exactly a realworld example. Even if you stick >>>>to plain C, a repeated putchar(' ') is 1-2 orders of magnitude slower >>>>than aggregating those characters and write()'ing them every few dozen >>>>chars. >>>> >>>> >>>This might seem obvious, but is it really true? I wrote a program that >>>tries it both ways with the output redirected to /dev/null and discovered >>>that filling a 24 character buffer and doing a write() takes about 11 times >>>as much cpu time as 24 putchar()s. Perhaps a buffer larger than a "few >>>dozen chars" would be useful. There must be a moral here somewhere. :-) >>> >>> >>Yes, it is really true. Since I don't know what your test is, I've created >>my own. >> >>... >> >>All files are compiled with gcc/g++ and the -O2 option. I'm running them on >>a Mac Mini under Linux. >> >>And the results are (I've run that command several times and picked a line >>that shows an average run time): >> >>$ time ./test_putchar > /dev/null >>./test_putchar > /dev/null 0.39s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 0.397 total >>$ time ./test_write > /dev/null >>./test_write > /dev/null 0.02s user 0.01s system 82% cpu 0.029 total >>$ time ./test_iostream > /dev/null >>./test_iostream > /dev/null 0.94s user 0.00s system 99% cpu 0.950 total >>$ time ./test_string > /dev/null >>./test_string > /dev/null 0.21s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 0.213 total >> >> >>That quite clearly shows that my prediction that using putchar is "1-2 orders >>of magnitude slower" is accurate. It also shows the points you and others >>have made that iostream is slower than C's I/O mechanisms. >> >>If we take the two most sensible variants, test_write and test_iostream, and >>have them write into a file, we get these numbers: >> >>$ time ./test_write > foo >>./test_write > foo 0.01s user 0.16s system 95% cpu 0.180 total >>$ time ./test_string > foo >>./test_string > foo 0.20s user 0.02s system 98% cpu 0.223 total >> >>Which is a small enough difference to be irrelevant. The large I/O performance >>advantage of the write(2) variant over the C++ string variant vanishes as >>soon as the code actually does something remotely useful. >> >> >> > >In order to make sure that we are comparing apples to apples and not >to oranges, I copied Benjamin Lutz's test programs and ran them on my >machine, a 2.8 GHz Intel P4 running FreeBSD 5.4. The repetition counts >in the programs were increased from 50K to 500K and the programs were >compiled with the -O2 option using whatever version of GNU gcc/g++ comes >standard with FreeBSD 5.4. > >times for output to /dev/null: > >test_putchar: 0.140u 0.000s 0:00.14 100.0% 5+180k 0+0io 0pf+0w >test_write: 0.163u 0.413s 0:00.57 100.0% 5+171k 0+0io 0pf+0w >test_iostream: 3.673u 0.015s 0:03.69 99.7% 5+179k 0+0io 0pf+0w >test_string: 0.789u 0.007s 0:00.79 98.7% 5+188k 0+0io 0pf+0w > >times for output to file foo: > >test_putchar: 0.145u 0.040s 0:01.82 9.8% 5+194k 0+232io 0pf+0w >test_write: 0.133u 1.333s 0:01.84 79.3% 6+170k 0+232io 0pf+0w >test_iostream: 3.635u 0.077s 0:03.73 99.1% 6+197k 0+232io 0pf+0w >test_string: 0.772u 0.076s 0:01.84 45.6% 8+213k 0+232io 0pf+0w > >My results show something quite different. Even though the buffer >size used by Benjamin's write() test (61 bytes) is much larger than >the one I used (only 24 bytes), the write() test to /dev/null still >takes about 4 times longer than the putchar() test. As one might >expect, the write() test spends most of its time in the kernel doing >all those write() system calls. The putchar() test (i.e. stdio) >is probably using a 1K byte buffer. > >I cannot explain Benjamin's results on a Mac Mini running Linux. >His write() test to /dev/null took almost no system time. Note that >on his system the write() test to a real file consumed 16 times as >much system time as the write() test to /dev/null (best guess since >the precision of his time measurement was so limited). On my system >the ratio was about 3 to one. His I/O system must be radically >different from mine. Does anyone know why? What does Linux do >differently than FreeBSD? > >I stand by my suggestion that using putchar() might not be slower. >On my system it was much faster. > >I also note that while most of the tests writing to a real file used >about the same real time, there were really huge differences in cpu >time. Test_putchar was the big winner, running 4.5 times faster than >test_string, 8 times faster than test_write, and 20 times faster than >test_iostream. Such differences in cpu consumption can be important >even when the processes are i/o bound because other processes running >on the same system may be cpu bound. > >Dan Strick >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 15:42:31 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44CF116A406 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:42:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (p65-147.acedsl.com [66.114.65.147]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9C1243D4C for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:42:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (localhost.natserv.net [127.0.0.1]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AA9CB849; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:42:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (zoraida.natserv.net [66.114.65.147]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D049BB830; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:42:29 -0400 (EDT) References: Message-ID: X-Mailer: http://www.courier-mta.org/cone/ From: Francisco Reyes To: David Stanford Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:42:29 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Cc: FreeBSD Chat List Subject: Re: Anyone ever tried experts-exchange for freebsd questions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:42:31 -0000 David Stanford writes: > I agree with Darren that you shouldn't need to sign up for > experts-exchange, as there are plenty of online resources available for > FreeBSD. As I replied to his post, I agree that given enough time between searching archives and the free lists one can get an answer. I am looking to see if that service may help on the times that the initial search/posts to the lists fail to yield an answer. > However, I do have an experts-exchange account and can tell you > that, although I have only needed to ask maybe four questions, you can > usually get much quicker responses than other places on the web and there > is also a fairly deep archive of previous posts to dig through Thanks for that feedback, but in particular I wanted to know the FreeBSD section. Do the "experts" there seem knowledgeable? > it's only $9.99 monthly and you can cancel at anytime. I will get the job to pay for it. :-) > up the next time you have an urgent question that can't wait and just > cancel the account if you feel it's not worth the cost. Usually I give the search/free list 3 to 4 days before I start to get desperate. :-) Specially if there is a project held up because I can't find an answer. > There is also http://bsdforums.org/...if you > weren't already aware... Actually I am aware of the forums, but must admit have not tried them. I think I will give them a try. Thanks for your feedback. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 15:48:33 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8C0C16A404 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:48:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Received: from www.hotlz.com (freedom.hotlz.com [209.20.218.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3251B43D5E for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:48:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Received: from [172.27.240.45] (henry.local.hotlz.com [172.27.240.45]) by www.hotlz.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k3NFmTw7043300; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:48:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Message-ID: <444BA1CD.9020902@hotlz.com> Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:48:29 -0700 From: Don Dugger User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Macintosh/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org References: <44490663.3040506@hotlz.com> <86d5f9pno8.fsf@xps.des.no> <444A652E.5010403@kanga.org> <864q0lplro.fsf@xps.des.no> <444A9DE6.4070203@hotlz.com> <86ejzpntn6.fsf@xps.des.no> <444AB293.40809@hotlz.com> <86acaco58x.fsf@xps.des.no> In-Reply-To: <86acaco58x.fsf@xps.des.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:48:34 -0000 Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: >Don Dugger writes: > > >>So if c++ isn't all that good it's ISO fault not ANSI? Why is this >>so important to you. >> >> > >It isn't. Please try reading what I write. You might want to read up >on C and C++ as well, and come back when you know a little bit more. > > > Just what have you contributed to this conversation other then criticism? If you have a point of view about the subject why don't you say it? So far all you've done is point out how smart you are, that you don't like ANSI and that c++ streams are not related to the SysV stream. And how much I know or don't know about c++ does not change the point, what does any of that have to do with the question? The fact is that each of your criticisms have reinforced my point of view, other then the one about streams. So what is it that your trying to do other then argue? Hey man you seem bright , I would really like your option of the subject. Your wasting your time criticizing me, I'm to old for it to have much effect. I really think the young man (I think it was a man) has a valid point, why isn't more software written c++? And my point is, that it's a myth that c++ it's self is a performance hit, and that there are ways to use c++ so as not to incur such performance hits. An on the subject of c++ standards. My point was and is that it's a world standard and that it is not own by some corporation. And why you insist on belittling ANSI role in the standard is beyond me. I in no way was trying to imply anything other then it was a standards group that was responsible for the definition. In my world when some refers to standard c they say "ANSI C" and I have already apologized if that offends you, but I don't think that any one that uses that term is thinking about the tact that it refers to only the US standard group they are simply referring to the standard and as I pointed out g++ compiler uses the term to mean use the standard c++. As to ANSIs role in the c++ standards is concerned I suggest you read the "Introduction" section of the book "The C++ Standard - Incorporating Technical Corrigendum No. 1 (BS ISO/IEC 14882: 2003 (Second Edition)" and pay special attention to the second to last paragraph. >>>He is Danish. Murray Hill, NJ is the location of AT&T Labs, where he >>>works. >>> >>> >>I know where AT&T *was*. >> >> > >was? AT&T and AT&T Labs are still very much alive. > > Again you miss the point. I was simply pocking fun at the old Bell System companys going though so many changes. And your technically wrong , SBC bought the old AT&T in November of last year and changed it's (SBCs) name to at&t. There back! (The old Bell System that is) [and before you find something wrong with that last comment, I was joking] >DES > > From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 19:12:17 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB43516A40F for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 19:12:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Received: from www.hotlz.com (freedom.hotlz.com [209.20.218.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48E9143D55 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 19:12:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Received: from [172.27.240.45] (henry.local.hotlz.com [172.27.240.45]) by www.hotlz.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k3NJCFvu045889 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:12:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Message-ID: <444BD18F.9080302@hotlz.com> Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:12:15 -0700 From: Don Dugger User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Macintosh/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org References: <200604231525.k3NFP64X003155@mist.nodomain> In-Reply-To: <200604231525.k3NFP64X003155@mist.nodomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 19:12:17 -0000 As I sit here on this beautiful day. It dawns on me that tried improving a program a few years back by changing printf("%s",s) to puts(s) and the puts() make it run much slower. I never found out why. I also remember doing research a year or so ago on GC and the guy that are proponents have some interesting ideas on performance. http://www.iecc.com/gclist/GC-faq.html Now I'm getting out of here its to nice of day... Don 8) Dan Strick wrote: >On Sunday 23 Apr 2006 02:03, Benjamin Lutz wrote: > > >>On Saturday 22 April 2006 17:11, Dan Strick wrote: >> >> >>>On Thursday 20 Apr 2006 22:58, Benjamin Lutz wrote: (this line corrected) >>> >>> >>>>The example above is not exactly a realworld example. Even if you stick >>>>to plain C, a repeated putchar(' ') is 1-2 orders of magnitude slower >>>>than aggregating those characters and write()'ing them every few dozen >>>>chars. >>>> >>>> >>>This might seem obvious, but is it really true? I wrote a program that >>>tries it both ways with the output redirected to /dev/null and discovered >>>that filling a 24 character buffer and doing a write() takes about 11 times >>>as much cpu time as 24 putchar()s. Perhaps a buffer larger than a "few >>>dozen chars" would be useful. There must be a moral here somewhere. :-) >>> >>> >>Yes, it is really true. Since I don't know what your test is, I've created >>my own. >> >>... >> >>All files are compiled with gcc/g++ and the -O2 option. I'm running them on >>a Mac Mini under Linux. >> >>And the results are (I've run that command several times and picked a line >>that shows an average run time): >> >>$ time ./test_putchar > /dev/null >>./test_putchar > /dev/null 0.39s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 0.397 total >>$ time ./test_write > /dev/null >>./test_write > /dev/null 0.02s user 0.01s system 82% cpu 0.029 total >>$ time ./test_iostream > /dev/null >>./test_iostream > /dev/null 0.94s user 0.00s system 99% cpu 0.950 total >>$ time ./test_string > /dev/null >>./test_string > /dev/null 0.21s user 0.00s system 97% cpu 0.213 total >> >> >>That quite clearly shows that my prediction that using putchar is "1-2 orders >>of magnitude slower" is accurate. It also shows the points you and others >>have made that iostream is slower than C's I/O mechanisms. >> >>If we take the two most sensible variants, test_write and test_iostream, and >>have them write into a file, we get these numbers: >> >>$ time ./test_write > foo >>./test_write > foo 0.01s user 0.16s system 95% cpu 0.180 total >>$ time ./test_string > foo >>./test_string > foo 0.20s user 0.02s system 98% cpu 0.223 total >> >>Which is a small enough difference to be irrelevant. The large I/O performance >>advantage of the write(2) variant over the C++ string variant vanishes as >>soon as the code actually does something remotely useful. >> >> >> > >In order to make sure that we are comparing apples to apples and not >to oranges, I copied Benjamin Lutz's test programs and ran them on my >machine, a 2.8 GHz Intel P4 running FreeBSD 5.4. The repetition counts >in the programs were increased from 50K to 500K and the programs were >compiled with the -O2 option using whatever version of GNU gcc/g++ comes >standard with FreeBSD 5.4. > >times for output to /dev/null: > >test_putchar: 0.140u 0.000s 0:00.14 100.0% 5+180k 0+0io 0pf+0w >test_write: 0.163u 0.413s 0:00.57 100.0% 5+171k 0+0io 0pf+0w >test_iostream: 3.673u 0.015s 0:03.69 99.7% 5+179k 0+0io 0pf+0w >test_string: 0.789u 0.007s 0:00.79 98.7% 5+188k 0+0io 0pf+0w > >times for output to file foo: > >test_putchar: 0.145u 0.040s 0:01.82 9.8% 5+194k 0+232io 0pf+0w >test_write: 0.133u 1.333s 0:01.84 79.3% 6+170k 0+232io 0pf+0w >test_iostream: 3.635u 0.077s 0:03.73 99.1% 6+197k 0+232io 0pf+0w >test_string: 0.772u 0.076s 0:01.84 45.6% 8+213k 0+232io 0pf+0w > >My results show something quite different. Even though the buffer >size used by Benjamin's write() test (61 bytes) is much larger than >the one I used (only 24 bytes), the write() test to /dev/null still >takes about 4 times longer than the putchar() test. As one might >expect, the write() test spends most of its time in the kernel doing >all those write() system calls. The putchar() test (i.e. stdio) >is probably using a 1K byte buffer. > >I cannot explain Benjamin's results on a Mac Mini running Linux. >His write() test to /dev/null took almost no system time. Note that >on his system the write() test to a real file consumed 16 times as >much system time as the write() test to /dev/null (best guess since >the precision of his time measurement was so limited). On my system >the ratio was about 3 to one. His I/O system must be radically >different from mine. Does anyone know why? What does Linux do >differently than FreeBSD? > >I stand by my suggestion that using putchar() might not be slower. >On my system it was much faster. > >I also note that while most of the tests writing to a real file used >about the same real time, there were really huge differences in cpu >time. Test_putchar was the big winner, running 4.5 times faster than >test_string, 8 times faster than test_write, and 20 times faster than >test_iostream. Such differences in cpu consumption can be important >even when the processes are i/o bound because other processes running >on the same system may be cpu bound. > >Dan Strick >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 23 20:32:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E83CB16A400 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 20:32:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from benlutz@datacomm.ch) Received: from maxlor.mine.nu (c-213-160-32-54.customer.ggaweb.ch [213.160.32.54]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFC7F43D58 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 20:32:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from benlutz@datacomm.ch) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 790122E0A7; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 22:32:35 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at atlantis.intranet Received: from maxlor.mine.nu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlantis.intranet [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J7L3wE3lmCDF; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 22:32:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mini.intranet (mini.intranet [10.0.0.17]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40DAF2E0A6; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 22:32:35 +0200 (CEST) From: Benjamin Lutz To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 22:32:26 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 References: <200604231525.k3NFP64X003155@mist.nodomain> In-Reply-To: <200604231525.k3NFP64X003155@mist.nodomain> X-Face: $Ov27?7*N,h60fIEfNJdb!m,@#4T/d; 1hw|W0zvsHM(a$Yn6BYQ0^SEEXvi8>D`|V*F"=?iso-8859-1?q?=5F+R=0A?= 2@Aq>+mNb4`,'[[%z9v0Fa~]AD1}xQO3|>b.z&}l#R-_(P`?@Mz"kS; XC>Eti,i3>%@g?4f,=?iso-8859-1?q?=5Cc7=7CGh=0A?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_wb=26ky=24b2PJ=5E=5C0b83NkLsFKv=7CsmL/cI4UD=25Tu8alAD?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1686217.LuTWpC3WUS"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200604232232.32653.benlutz@datacomm.ch> Cc: Dan Strick , dan@mist.nodomain Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 20:32:41 -0000 --nextPart1686217.LuTWpC3WUS Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hello Dan, On Sunday 23 April 2006 17:25, Dan Strick wrote: > My results show something quite different. Even though the buffer > size used by Benjamin's write() test (61 bytes) is much larger than > the one I used (only 24 bytes), the write() test to /dev/null still > takes about 4 times longer than the putchar() test. As one might > expect, the write() test spends most of its time in the kernel doing > all those write() system calls. The putchar() test (i.e. stdio) > is probably using a 1K byte buffer. Your results are intriguing. I ran the tests again on a FreeBSD-6 machine (= A=20 Sempron 3000+), and I see the same thing, test_putchar runs faster and with= =20 much lower cpu load than test_write. I'm not sure what to make of this. I would have said that the reason that=20 write() is faster is because there's much fewer kernel calls necessary. I'm= =20 beginning to think though that FreeBSD's write(2) implementation is not as= =20 good as it could be. My Linux Mac Mini using a notebook HD actually runs=20 test_write 10% faster than the FreeBSD Sempron 3000+ using proper SATA disk= s. Or maybe Linux just cheats by doing some smart delaying/caching. Thinking about it some more, I think you're right with your assumption that= =20 test_putchar is faster because stdio does some internal buffering. I ran=20 ktrace on test_putchar (the version with 500'000 lines), and it calls write= ()=20 4562 times on said FreeBSD system, each time with 0x1000 as last argument, = ie=20 it uses 4KB buffers. To confirm that buffering to be the reason, I increase= d=20 the size of each line from 61 bytes to 16001 bytes, at which point the=20 write() version showed a clear performance advantage on FreeBSD as well. I had not thought about this possibility when I made my original statement.= =20 Given that, it makes sense that putchar is quite fast. It still puzzles me though why the Mini (it's only a 1.25GHz G4!) beats the= =20 Sempron though. > I stand by my suggestion that using putchar() might not be slower. > On my system it was much faster. Ok, I accept that then. If we think of a case where buffering must not happ= en,=20 and thus a putchar() must be followed by a fflush(), would you agree that=20 just using write() is faster? Cheers Benjamin --nextPart1686217.LuTWpC3WUS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBES+RggShs4qbRdeQRAuKiAKCMMKlSqyVQ4iPWjl57tC1P09Pd0gCfZnHv ZD3ubC1zpcJp1RevrflvVXE= =nQTd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1686217.LuTWpC3WUS-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 24 02:28:07 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B26B116A400 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 02:28:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Received: from www.hotlz.com (freedom.hotlz.com [209.20.218.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDF2643D76 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 02:27:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Received: from [172.27.240.45] (henry.local.hotlz.com [172.27.240.45]) by www.hotlz.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k3O2RZ0G051728; Sun, 23 Apr 2006 19:27:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dugger@hotlz.com) Message-ID: <444C3797.7010909@hotlz.com> Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 19:27:35 -0700 From: Don Dugger User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (Macintosh/20060308) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org References: <200604231525.k3NFP64X003155@mist.nodomain> <200604232232.32653.benlutz@datacomm.ch> In-Reply-To: <200604232232.32653.benlutz@datacomm.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Benjamin Lutz , Dan Strick Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 02:28:07 -0000 For fun I run the tests on a SUN box I have here it's an old Sparc 200MHz Running Solaris 8. and I used the gcc 3.4.2 compiler. ---------- time ./test_putchar >/dev/null real 0m0.45s user 0m0.44s sys 0m0.01s time ./test_write >/dev/null real 0m0.66s user 0m0.38s sys 0m0.28s time ./test_iostream >/dev/null real 0m3.28s user 0m3.12s sys 0m0.04s time ./test_string >/dev/null real 0m1.50s user 0m1.48s sys 0m0.02s ---------- Don 8) Benjamin Lutz wrote: > Hello Dan, > > On Sunday 23 April 2006 17:25, Dan Strick wrote: > >> My results show something quite different. Even though the buffer >> size used by Benjamin's write() test (61 bytes) is much larger than >> the one I used (only 24 bytes), the write() test to /dev/null still >> takes about 4 times longer than the putchar() test. As one might >> expect, the write() test spends most of its time in the kernel doing >> all those write() system calls. The putchar() test (i.e. stdio) >> is probably using a 1K byte buffer. >> > > Your results are intriguing. I ran the tests again on a FreeBSD-6 machine (A > Sempron 3000+), and I see the same thing, test_putchar runs faster and with > much lower cpu load than test_write. > > I'm not sure what to make of this. I would have said that the reason that > write() is faster is because there's much fewer kernel calls necessary. I'm > beginning to think though that FreeBSD's write(2) implementation is not as > good as it could be. My Linux Mac Mini using a notebook HD actually runs > test_write 10% faster than the FreeBSD Sempron 3000+ using proper SATA disks. > > Or maybe Linux just cheats by doing some smart delaying/caching. > > Thinking about it some more, I think you're right with your assumption that > test_putchar is faster because stdio does some internal buffering. I ran > ktrace on test_putchar (the version with 500'000 lines), and it calls write() > 4562 times on said FreeBSD system, each time with 0x1000 as last argument, ie > it uses 4KB buffers. To confirm that buffering to be the reason, I increased > the size of each line from 61 bytes to 16001 bytes, at which point the > write() version showed a clear performance advantage on FreeBSD as well. > > I had not thought about this possibility when I made my original statement. > Given that, it makes sense that putchar is quite fast. > > It still puzzles me though why the Mini (it's only a 1.25GHz G4!) beats the > Sempron though. > > >> I stand by my suggestion that using putchar() might not be slower. >> On my system it was much faster. >> > > Ok, I accept that then. If we think of a case where buffering must not happen, > and thus a putchar() must be followed by a fflush(), would you agree that > just using write() is faster? > > Cheers > Benjamin > From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 24 03:15:11 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94A8B16A401 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 03:15:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aw1@stade.co.uk) Received: from lon-mail-3.gradwell.net (lon-mail-3.gradwell.net [193.111.201.127]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB8BC43D5F for ; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 03:15:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from aw1@stade.co.uk) Received: from alsager-adsl.stade.co.uk ([81.6.222.119] helo=access2.hanley.stade.co.uk) by lon-mail-3.gradwell.net with esmtp (Gradwell gwh-smtpd 1.214) id 444c42b7.d74d.164 for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 04:15:03 +0100 (envelope-sender ) Received: from steerpike.hanley.stade.co.uk (steerpike [192.168.1.10]) by access2.hanley.stade.co.uk (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k3O3Evov011132 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 04:14:57 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from aw1@steerpike.hanley.stade.co.uk) Received: from steerpike.hanley.stade.co.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by steerpike.hanley.stade.co.uk (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k3O3EvJ0016930 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 04:14:57 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from aw1@steerpike.hanley.stade.co.uk) Received: (from aw1@localhost) by steerpike.hanley.stade.co.uk (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k3O3Eu9n016929 for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 04:14:56 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from aw1) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 04:14:56 +0100 From: Adrian Wontroba To: FreeBSD Chat List Message-ID: <20060424031456.GA16790@steerpike.hanley.stade.co.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Adrian Wontroba , FreeBSD Chat List References: <20060423065050.GA35136@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.4-STABLE Organization: Oh dear, I've joined one again. X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.1/1421/Sun Apr 23 19:31:05 2006 on access2.hanley.stade.co.uk X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: dumb names (was Re: Anyone ever tried experts-exchange for freebsd questions?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: aw1@stade.co.uk List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 03:15:11 -0000 On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:04:08AM -0400, Francisco Reyes wrote: > Kris Kennaway writes: > >their website used to be expertsexchange.com, which turned out not to > >be so well thought out from a marketing perspective. > Hehe.. that was dumb.. I had a Doh! moment of my own, long before Homer appeared. One place I worked used "test" as a prefix for user names, followed by the user's initials. Our hardware supplier, International Computers Limited (the name is now gone, the remains being part of the Fujitsu empire), wanted a test user. It was only when listings with TESTICL banner headings appeared on my desk that I realised what I'd done. -- Adrian Wontroba From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 25 03:56:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: FreeBSD-Chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: FreeBSD-Chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 940D316A402 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 03:56:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adams.benjamin@gmail.com) Received: from xproxy.gmail.com (xproxy.gmail.com [66.249.82.203]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 282A343D45 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 03:56:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from adams.benjamin@gmail.com) Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id s9so734390wxc for ; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 20:56:40 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:date:from:to:subject:message-id:organization:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=TPadzz9N6K3dcN29Z/aXJp7a2jFVIoaU2Q/2GQO46f9zqWMbzsdAIC22Bw216MVpjP3zHu4yjvOBF1bCvyOD6qX0dphJoBNF63odT3mBfa8sOg0M6S4/I1D2/IQf6JxmcOqsWGmDpvrbjpqBLjaC6a3d7wPY5kiBbHhatIZHk/A= Received: by 10.70.105.15 with SMTP id d15mr1073482wxc; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 20:56:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com ( [72.226.224.84]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id i35sm766117wxd.2006.04.24.20.56.40; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 20:56:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:50:37 -0400 From: Benjamin Adams To: FreeBSD-Chat@freebsd.org Message-Id: <20060424235037.70ba6c5c.adams.benjamin@gmail.com> Organization: FreeBSDWorld.NET X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.17; i386-portbld-freebsd6.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Little help with Gmail and Mutt X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 03:56:41 -0000 Can someone with gmail email me with an example of .muttrc I'm trying to get mutt to work with my gmail account but no luck. I want to use postfix as the transfer protocol. Thanks for any help Ben From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 25 06:40:38 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E7B216A403; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 06:40:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Received: from ext-gw.lemis.com (ext-gw.lemis.com [150.101.14.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F76F43D49; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 06:40:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Received: from wantadilla.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.135]) by ext-gw.lemis.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B16F4131D85; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 16:10:34 +0930 (CST) Received: by wantadilla.lemis.com (Postfix, from userid 1004) id 9E4BB85E9B; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 16:10:34 +0930 (CST) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 16:10:34 +0930 From: Greg 'groggy' Lehey To: FreeBSD Chat Message-ID: <20060425064034.GA69628@wantadilla.lemis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Organization: The FreeBSD Project Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 VoIP: sip:0871270137@sip.internode.on.net WWW-Home-Page: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ X-PGP-Fingerprint: 9A1B 8202 BCCE B846 F92F 09AC 22E6 F290 507A 4223 Cc: Subject: In Cupertino next weekend X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 06:40:38 -0000 --IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline I'll be in Cupertino and the area from midday, Friday 5 May until very early Sunday. I'll have things to do, but probably also some spare time. If anybody wants to get together, please let me know. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers. --IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFETcRiIubykFB6QiMRAg2tAJ438iAGJjIIA57Hdp/LiJIJkuPqLwCaAusL NRCHID2WDrSkAB6IXJ+3I/o= =GMu1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 25 07:35:18 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AACF016A401 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 07:35:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aaron@aaronholmes.net) Received: from evildomain.org (adsl-69-105-23-134.dsl.irvnca.pacbell.net [69.105.23.134]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6964B43D46 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 07:35:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from aaron@aaronholmes.net) Received: by evildomain.org (Postfix, from userid 1013) id 326115C7; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:35:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on evildomain.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=ham version=3.1.1 Received: from [192.168.1.99] (router.evildomain.org [192.168.1.1]) by evildomain.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E5C45BC for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:35:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <444DD134.1090205@aaronholmes.net> Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:35:16 -0700 From: Aaron Holmes User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: this has nothing to do with FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 07:35:18 -0000 but I felt everyone should have a chance to participate http://blog.evildomain.org/?p=97 Take the time to leave a comment or something. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 25 14:30:55 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 147EC16A402; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:30:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from a50.ironport.com (a50.ironport.com [63.251.108.112]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0DD943D48; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:30:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.2.4]) ([10.251.60.70]) by a50.ironport.com with ESMTP; 25 Apr 2006 07:30:55 -0700 Message-ID: <444E329D.6080405@elischer.org> Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 07:30:53 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg 'groggy' Lehey References: <20060425064034.GA69628@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <20060425064034.GA69628@wantadilla.lemis.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: In Cupertino next weekend X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:30:55 -0000 Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >I'll be in Cupertino and the area from midday, Friday 5 May until very >early Sunday. I'll have things to do, but probably also some spare >time. If anybody wants to get together, please let me know. > >Greg >-- >See complete headers for address and phone numbers. > > you'll miss the Bafug meeting by 2 days.. (the 3rd) Pitty, because Alan Cox will be there and hopefully others as well. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 25 15:22:43 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7134B16A402 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:22:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from illoai@gmail.com) Received: from xproxy.gmail.com (xproxy.gmail.com [66.249.82.200]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD3A043D45 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:22:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from illoai@gmail.com) Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id s9so809678wxc for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:22:41 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=htO2tG8ijUfnm2Wu1Vzn12RtXUNgKRIDBSZ7IIfpZQg+5O1UrUr5QCpuVKILqa9QKf1NNntaEDkSQHtCx6ELwlzKWnQ4RSnDB8XqyGRSMUbd+URowdJNUBk5UWQtG4YKPCVJJVo/kvlVjuEs/AbrOzZLHWXDUVMx45X6LwLHwU4= Received: by 10.70.48.14 with SMTP id v14mr3849693wxv; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:22:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.57.8 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:22:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:22:41 -0500 From: "illoai@gmail.com" To: "Aaron Holmes" In-Reply-To: <444DD134.1090205@aaronholmes.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <444DD134.1090205@aaronholmes.net> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: this has nothing to do with FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:22:43 -0000 On 4/25/06, Aaron Holmes babbled: > but I felt everyone I hope they have hit-counters as well. I hope they care. -- -- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 26 00:38:43 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5FCA16A40E for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 00:38:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from root@jgl.inksterstattoo.net) Received: from jgl.inksterstattoo.net (jgl.inksterstattoo.net [64.105.196.234]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EF9B43D58 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 00:38:43 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from root@jgl.inksterstattoo.net) Received: by jgl.inksterstattoo.net (Postfix, from userid 0) id 1754924840D; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:38:19 -0400 (EDT) To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org From: "Customer Support" <"support@paypal.com"@jgl.inksterstattoo.net> Errors-To: support@paypal.com Message-Id: <20060426003819.1754924840D@jgl.inksterstattoo.net> Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:38:19 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: account maintenance and verification ( Your account is suspended ) X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: support@paypal.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 00:38:44 -0000 [1][paypal_logo.gif] [pixel.gif] PayPal Security Measures! In accordance with PayPal's User Agreement and to ensure that your account has not been compromised, access to your account was limited. Your account access will remain limited until this issue has been resolved. To secure your account and quickly restore full access, we may require some additional information from you. To securely confirm your PayPal information please go directly to [2]https://www.paypal.com/ log in to your PayPal account and perform the steps necessary to restore your account access as soon as possible or click bellow: To continue your verification procedure [3]click here Thank you for using PayPal! The PayPal Team Please do not reply to this e-mail. Mail sent to this address cannot be answered. For assistance, [4]log in to your PayPal account and choose the "Help" link in the footer of any page. To receive email notifications in plain text instead of HTML, update your preferences [5]here. [pixel.gif] References 1. http://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_home 2. http://www.romspedition.ro/webmail.htm/www.paypal.com/ws/cgi-bin/webscr/login-submit/redirect.to.paypal.com/paypal/login.html 3. http://www.romspedition.ro/webmail.htm/www.paypal.com/ws/cgi-bin/webscr/login-submit/redirect.to.paypal.com/paypal/login.html 4. http://www.romspedition.ro/webmail.htm/www.paypal.com/ws/cgi-bin/webscr/login-submit/redirect.to.paypal.com/paypal/login.html 5. https://www.paypal.com/us/PREFS-NOTI From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 26 05:21:46 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68EBB16A405 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 05:21:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from samuraiblog@gmail.com) Received: from uproxy.gmail.com (uproxy.gmail.com [66.249.92.171]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B404643D49 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 05:21:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from samuraiblog@gmail.com) Received: by uproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id m3so1104268ugc for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 22:21:44 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=I/xwj1TEGSGSFOPJR4do47mL3xT94NThkPYFgtLvJGZpkZbz9qAx2cHKI1PEZ9khsUK+z1QaSEUo+nSsfZdGHc+tThSmaJeKG5bJ1VRQyRvHd+bhnQHQ+9lLWD0Rbq5Lcj8Goy83KYJtxxQzAtte/huWow8I7EVlUOYuJeDidY0= Received: by 10.78.18.3 with SMTP id 3mr16308hur; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 22:21:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.78.46.8 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 22:21:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <219837f70604252221x33d8d415k5b4fd2dcad6c6052@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:21:43 -0600 From: "Sam Sutch" To: support@paypal.com In-Reply-To: <20060426003819.1754924840D@jgl.inksterstattoo.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060426003819.1754924840D@jgl.inksterstattoo.net> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: account maintenance and verification ( Your account is suspended ) X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 05:21:46 -0000 Smells like FISH. I had a g--nevermind. -Sam On 4/25/06, Customer Support <"support@paypal.com"@jgl.inksterstattoo.net> wrote: > > [1][paypal_logo.gif] > > [pixel.gif] > > PayPal Security Measures! > > In accordance with PayPal's User Agreement and to ensure that your > account has not been compromised, access to your account was limited. > Your account access will remain limited until this issue has been > resolved. To secure your account and quickly restore full access, we > may require some additional information from you. > > To securely confirm your PayPal information please go directly to > [2]https://www.paypal.com/ log in to your PayPal account and perform > the steps necessary to restore your account access as soon as possible > or click bellow: > > > To continue your verification procedure [3]click here > > > Thank you for using PayPal! > The PayPal Team > > Please do not reply to this e-mail. Mail sent to this address cannot > be answered. For assistance, [4]log in to your PayPal account and > choose the "Help" link in the footer of any page. > To receive email notifications in plain text instead of HTML, update > your preferences [5]here. > [pixel.gif] > > References > > 1. http://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=3D_home > 2. http://www.romspedition.ro/webmail.htm/www.paypal.com/ws/cgi-bin/we= bscr/login-submit/redirect.to.paypal.com/paypal/login.html > 3. http://www.romspedition.ro/webmail.htm/www.paypal.com/ws/cgi-bin/we= bscr/login-submit/redirect.to.paypal.com/paypal/login.html > 4. http://www.romspedition.ro/webmail.htm/www.paypal.com/ws/cgi-bin/we= bscr/login-submit/redirect.to.paypal.com/paypal/login.html > 5. https://www.paypal.com/us/PREFS-NOTI > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 26 13:38:56 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46BD816A400 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:38:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpetsmoker@gmail.com) Received: from nproxy.gmail.com (nproxy.gmail.com [64.233.182.184]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7FFB43D6D for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:38:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from carpetsmoker@gmail.com) Received: by nproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id x37so1139724nfc for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 06:38:49 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:to:subject:cc:content-type:mime-version:references:content-transfer-encoding:date:message-id:in-reply-to:user-agent:from; b=mQ+pFc7x+scKsM/DpwD3HLK2Dos758aV17jNsbOp6hYvOjKpt7xVi8IA6zDDT1PZAWRvTgwYedlIFqEYoEVnJj8BM052zKQt2uMpIo1JqgpLMMQzS9NnAj4qxIekAOkRkNvLe62fyRuhAyASwheKNdP2sTvm3eTogGU4nPE9GyI= Received: by 10.48.205.14 with SMTP id c14mr4457689nfg; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 03:45:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from carpetsmoker.ictwerkplaats.org ( [80.126.94.163]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id d2sm1088644nfe.2006.04.26.03.45.47; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 03:45:48 -0700 (PDT) To: "Sam Sutch" , support@paypal.com Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20060426003819.1754924840D@jgl.inksterstattoo.net> <219837f70604252221x33d8d415k5b4fd2dcad6c6052@mail.gmail.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 12:44:53 -0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <219837f70604252221x33d8d415k5b4fd2dcad6c6052@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.00 (FreeBSD) From: Martin Tournoy Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: account maintenance and verification ( Your account is suspended ) X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:38:56 -0000 Rotten fish, that is... > Smells like FISH. > > I had a g--nevermind. > > -Sam > > On 4/25/06, Customer Support > <"support@paypal.com"@jgl.inksterstattoo.net> wrote: >> >> [1][paypal_logo.gif] >> >> [pixel.gif] >> >> PayPal Security Measures! >> >> In accordance with PayPal's User Agreement and to ensure that your= >> account has not been compromised, access to your account was limit= ed. >> Your account access will remain limited until this issue has been >> resolved. To secure your account and quickly restore full access, = we >> may require some additional information from you. >> >> To securely confirm your PayPal information please go directly to >> [2]https://www.paypal.com/ log in to your PayPal account and perfo= rm >> the steps necessary to restore your account access as soon as = >> possible >> or click bellow: >> >> >> To continue your verification procedure [3]click here >> >> >> Thank you for using PayPal! >> The PayPal Team >> >> Please do not reply to this e-mail. Mail sent to this address cann= ot >> be answered. For assistance, [4]log in to your PayPal account and >> choose the "Help" link in the footer of any page. >> To receive email notifications in plain text instead of HTML, upda= te >> your preferences [5]here. >> [pixel.gif] >> >> References >> >> 1. http://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=3D_home >> 2. = >> http://www.romspedition.ro/webmail.htm/www.paypal.com/ws/cgi-bin/webs= cr/login-submit/redirect.to.paypal.com/paypal/login.html >> 3. = >> http://www.romspedition.ro/webmail.htm/www.paypal.com/ws/cgi-bin/webs= cr/login-submit/redirect.to.paypal.com/paypal/login.html >> 4. = >> http://www.romspedition.ro/webmail.htm/www.paypal.com/ws/cgi-bin/webs= cr/login-submit/redirect.to.paypal.com/paypal/login.html >> 5. https://www.paypal.com/us/PREFS-NOTI >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.or= g" >> > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org= " From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 27 09:17:47 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB7516A400 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 09:17:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from soralx@cydem.org) Received: from pd4mo2so.prod.shaw.ca (shawidc-mo1.cg.shawcable.net [24.71.223.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54CA943D45 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 09:17:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from soralx@cydem.org) Received: from pd5mr6so.prod.shaw.ca (pd5mr6so-qfe3.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.141.182]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IYD00COEJ5MJ680@l-daemon> for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 03:17:46 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pn2ml6so.prod.shaw.ca ([10.0.121.150]) by pd5mr6so.prod.shaw.ca (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IYD00G1EJ5ML0F0@pd5mr6so.prod.shaw.ca> for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 03:17:46 -0600 (MDT) Received: from soralx.cydem.org ([24.87.27.3]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IYD002JSJ5MDAT0@l-daemon> for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 03:17:46 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 02:17:43 -0700 From: soralx@cydem.org To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Message-id: <200604270217.43493.soralx@cydem.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Subject: KMail to mbox X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 09:17:47 -0000 Anyone got an idea how to convert KMail's ~/Mail/* to standard mboxes? Timestamp: 0x44508BA9 [SorAlx] ridin' VN1500-B2 From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 27 22:59:40 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42ABE16A403 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:59:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (p65-147.acedsl.com [66.114.65.147]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4CDA43D5A for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:59:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (localhost.natserv.net [127.0.0.1]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 453D0B84D; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:59:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 35st-server.simplicato.com (static-71-249-233-130.nycmny.east.verizon.net [71.249.233.130]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7840B84B; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:59:36 -0400 (EDT) References: <20060423065050.GA35136@xor.obsecurity.org> <20060424031456.GA16790@steerpike.hanley.stade.co.uk> Message-ID: X-Mailer: http://www.courier-mta.org/cone/ From: Francisco Reyes To: aw1@stade.co.uk Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:59:36 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Cc: FreeBSD Chat List Subject: Re: dumb names (was Re: Anyone ever tried experts-exchange for freebsd questions?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:59:40 -0000 Adrian Wontroba writes: > a test user. It was only when listings with TESTICL banner headings > appeared on my desk that I realised what I'd done. Hehe.. That's a good one. I think the hardest time with names are had by international companies. I recall a news article how often times names that sound "hip" or interesting in one country are rude/offensive in another. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 27 23:03:59 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1808D16A405 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:03:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (p65-147.acedsl.com [66.114.65.147]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8CCD43D45 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:03:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (localhost.natserv.net [127.0.0.1]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE7CB849 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 19:03:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 35st-server.simplicato.com (static-71-249-233-130.nycmny.east.verizon.net [71.249.233.130]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5BB7B830 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 19:03:57 -0400 (EDT) References: <200604211034.k3LAY0TP096656@lurza.secnetix.de> Message-ID: X-Mailer: http://www.courier-mta.org/cone/ From: Francisco Reyes To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 19:03:57 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Cc: Subject: Re: What ever happened to Terasolutions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:03:59 -0000 Oliver Fromme writes: > (In other words: PAE might enable you to use RAM >= 4 GB, > but your processes will still be limited to 32bit address > space.) Thanks for the pointer. That is a good reason to go AMD64 if one has apps which will require lots of RAM, although I can't think of any program I use ever needing 4GB+ for a single program. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 27 23:40:20 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1BD216A400 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:40:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from v.velox@vvelox.net) Received: from mail07.powweb.com (mail07.powweb.com [66.152.97.40]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1B9143D4C for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:40:20 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from v.velox@vvelox.net) Received: from vixen42.vulpes (24-119-225-24.cpe.cableone.net [24.119.225.24]) by mail07.powweb.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE6AE14DD53; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:40:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:41:57 -0500 From: Vulpes Velox To: soralx@cydem.org Message-ID: <20060427184157.1e9bd094@vixen42.vulpes> In-Reply-To: <200604270217.43493.soralx@cydem.org> References: <200604270217.43493.soralx@cydem.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.1.1 (GTK+ 2.8.17; i386-portbld-freebsd5.4) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: KMail to mbox X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:40:20 -0000 On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 02:17:43 -0700 soralx@cydem.org wrote: > > Anyone got an idea how to convert KMail's ~/Mail/* to standard > mboxes? It is most likely using either MH or Maildir. I honestly suggest leaving it as that and forgeting about the evilness that is mbox, but if you want to, there are a few ports in the ports tree that should be useful. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 28 00:45:22 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D00C316A408 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:45:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from darren.pilgrim@bitfreak.org) Received: from mail.bitfreak.org (mail.bitfreak.org [65.75.198.146]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B3F443D45 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:45:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from darren.pilgrim@bitfreak.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (mail.bitfreak.org [65.75.198.146]) by mail.bitfreak.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4957619F2C; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:45:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <445165A0.6060505@bitfreak.org> Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:45:20 -0700 From: Darren Pilgrim User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (Windows/20060308) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Francisco Reyes References: <200604211034.k3LAY0TP096656@lurza.secnetix.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: What ever happened to Terasolutions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:45:22 -0000 Francisco Reyes wrote: > Oliver Fromme writes: > >> (In other words: PAE might enable you to use RAM >= 4 GB, >> but your processes will still be limited to 32bit address >> space.) > > Thanks for the pointer. > That is a good reason to go AMD64 if one has apps which will require > lots of RAM, although I can't think of any program I use ever needing > 4GB+ for a single program. PostgreSQL uses shared buffers. The address space for each server process could easily exceed 4 GB unless SYSVSHM is a special case. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 28 05:27:11 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A064F16A403 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 05:27:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from soralx@cydem.org) Received: from pd3mo2so.prod.shaw.ca (shawidc-mo1.cg.shawcable.net [24.71.223.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC57943D5A for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 05:27:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from soralx@cydem.org) Received: from pd4mr6so.prod.shaw.ca (pd4mr6so-qfe3.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.141.69]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IYF00C7F35A3JE0@l-daemon> for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:27:10 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pn2ml8so.prod.shaw.ca ([10.0.121.152]) by pd4mr6so.prod.shaw.ca (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IYF00HAE35AZZ30@pd4mr6so.prod.shaw.ca> for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:27:10 -0600 (MDT) Received: from soralx.cydem.org ([24.87.27.3]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IYF00J4635A0QC0@l-daemon> for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:27:10 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:27:09 -0700 From: soralx@cydem.org In-reply-to: <20060427184157.1e9bd094@vixen42.vulpes> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Message-id: <200604272227.09721.soralx@cydem.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline References: <200604270217.43493.soralx@cydem.org> <20060427184157.1e9bd094@vixen42.vulpes> User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Subject: Re: KMail to mbox X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 05:27:11 -0000 > > Anyone got an idea how to convert KMail's ~/Mail/* to standard > > mboxes? > It is most likely using either MH or Maildir. I honestly suggest > leaving it as that and forgeting about the evilness that is mbox, but > if you want to, there are a few ports in the ports tree that should > be useful. The complication is that the filthy KMail saves message flags in some 'index' files (instead of in message headers). All I want to do really is to convert these into any standard format, such as mbox (what's evil about it, BTW?) for use with some normal mail client (Sylpheed probably). Timestamp: 0x4451A5ED [SorAlx] ridin' VN1500-B2 From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 28 09:01:05 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: FreeBSD-Chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: FreeBSD-Chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBB9B16A402 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:01:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from loader@freebsdmall.com) Received: from mail.freebsdmall.com (69.50.233.168.ip.nectartech.com [69.50.233.168]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7468A43D46 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:01:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from loader@freebsdmall.com) Received: by mail.freebsdmall.com (Postfix, from userid 2136) id 0F87C6AB944; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 02:01:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: emacs 22.0.50.1 (via feedmail 8 I) From: loader To: Benjamin Adams References: <20060424235037.70ba6c5c.adams.benjamin@gmail.com> User-Agent: Emacs 22.0.50.1 on i386-unknown-freebsd6.0 X-GPG-Public-Key: http://www.freebsdmall.com/~loader/loader.asc X-GPG-Key-ID: 1024D/0277E075 X-GPG-Key-Fingerprint: F8A0 A354 5D97 B175 7FC9 15DC 0771 07CF 0277 E075 Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:00:58 +0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: FreeBSD-Chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Little help with Gmail and Mutt X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:01:05 -0000 Benjamin Adams wrote: > Can someone with gmail email me with an example of .muttrc > I'm trying to get mutt to work with my gmail account but no luck. % cd /usr/ports/mail/mutt-devel-lite % sudo make install clean mutt 1.4.x can't support Gmail's POPs well. .muttrc set pop_user=your_gmail_username set pop_pass=your_gmail_password set pop_host=pops://pop.gmail.com set sendmail="/usr/local/bin/msmtp" % cd /usr/ports/mail/msmtp either % sudo make WITH_GNUTLS=yes install clean or % sudo make WITH_OPENSSL=yes install clean should work for gmail .msmtprc account default host smtp.gmail.com from your_username@gmail.com tls on auth on port 587 user your_gmail_username password your_gmail_password That's it. Or maybe you could use security/stunnel to handle the SSL part, and then set everything like normal SMTP/POP in msmtp/mutt. stunnel.conf: client = yes debug = debug [gmail-pop3s] accept = 127.0.0.1:10110 connect = pop.gmail.com:995 [gmail-smtps] accept = 127.0.0.1:10025 connect = smtp.gmail.com:587 protocol = smtp % stunnel stunnel.conf Then you can set the SMTP/POP to localhost, this works for mutt 1.4.x, and older verions of msmtp (when WITH_GNUTLS is marked as broken) > I want to use postfix as the transfer protocol. The default value of sendmail in mutt is: /usr/sbin/sendmail -oem -oi If you setup postfix properly on your FreeBSD box, I think that default settings should work for you. And If you want to send emails via postfix, and only use mutt for reading mails. Maybe mail/fetchmail is a good choice for fetching email from Gmail's POPs server. Just add fetchmail as a cron job instead of waiting mutt to fetch emails everytime when you run login to the system. .fetchmailrc poll pop.gmail.com with proto pop3 port 995 \ user "your_gmail_username" there with password "your_gmail_passwd" is "your_local_account" here options fetchall ssl Regards, loader From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 28 09:13:31 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DF2616A401 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:13:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DABC543D4C for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:13:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (pknwlu@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k3S9DNVb042079 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:13:29 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id k3S9DNG5042078; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:13:23 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from olli) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:13:23 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <200604280913.k3S9DNG5042078@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-chat User-Agent: tin/1.8.0-20051224 ("Ronay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:13:29 +0200 (CEST) Cc: Subject: Re: What ever happened to Terasolutions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:13:31 -0000 Francisco Reyes wrote: > Oliver Fromme writes: > > (In other words: PAE might enable you to use RAM >= 4 GB, > > but your processes will still be limited to 32bit address > > space.) > > Thanks for the pointer. > That is a good reason to go AMD64 if one has apps which will require lots of > RAM, although I can't think of any program I use ever needing 4GB+ for a > single program. An app doesn't necessarily have to require lots of RAM to benefit from 64bit address space. For example, a certain database process might benefit from accessing, say, 8 GB in its address space, but only actually using 2 GB of physical RAM. Such a process runs fine on a machine with 2 or 3 GB RAM, but it has to be a 64bit system. It won't run on a 32bit system, even if it had 8 GB RAM or more (accessed via PAE). Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 28 12:03:26 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB3FA16A407 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:03:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from benlutz@datacomm.ch) Received: from maxlor.mine.nu (c-213-160-32-54.customer.ggaweb.ch [213.160.32.54]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD96643D48 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:03:25 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from benlutz@datacomm.ch) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0BC42E0AB; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:42:58 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at atlantis.intranet Received: from maxlor.mine.nu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlantis.intranet [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8YDoPh7d6J1s; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:42:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mini.intranet (mini.intranet [10.0.0.17]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C409A2E0A9; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:42:58 +0200 (CEST) From: Benjamin Lutz To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:42:53 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 References: <200604270217.43493.soralx@cydem.org> <20060427184157.1e9bd094@vixen42.vulpes> <200604272227.09721.soralx@cydem.org> In-Reply-To: <200604272227.09721.soralx@cydem.org> X-Face: $Ov27?7*N,h60fIEfNJdb!m,@#4T/d; 1hw|W0zvsHM(a$Yn6BYQ0^SEEXvi8>D`|V*F"=?iso-8859-1?q?=5F+R=0A?= 2@Aq>+mNb4`,'[[%z9v0Fa~]AD1}xQO3|>b.z&}l#R-_(P`?@Mz"kS; XC>Eti,i3>%@g?4f,=?iso-8859-1?q?=5Cc7=7CGh=0A?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_wb=26ky=24b2PJ=5E=5C0b83NkLsFKv=7CsmL/cI4UD=25Tu8alAD?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart5654550.vkYAk7iiof"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200604281342.56030.benlutz@datacomm.ch> Cc: Subject: Re: KMail to mbox X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:03:26 -0000 --nextPart5654550.vkYAk7iiof Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 28 April 2006 07:27, soralx@cydem.org wrote: > The complication is that the filthy KMail saves message flags in some > 'index' files (instead of in message headers). All I want to do really > is to convert these into any standard format, such as mbox (what's evil > about it, BTW?) for use with some normal mail client (Sylpheed probably). For the gist, see: http://www.freebsdwiki.net/index.php/Mbox http://www.freebsdwiki.net/index.php/Maildir Cheers Benjamin --nextPart5654550.vkYAk7iiof Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEUf/AgShs4qbRdeQRAvavAJ4yXlbva83hD/VutPYf30oGG7MAtACePoVM gO7yHBYBimFcKBRQWzaVq24= =zDCm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart5654550.vkYAk7iiof-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 28 12:07:01 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B563116A402 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:07:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (66-23-211-162.clients.speedfactory.net [66.23.211.162]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3421743D46 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:07:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from zion.baldwin.cx (zion.baldwin.cx [192.168.0.7]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k3SC6wDr090609; Fri, 28 Apr 2006 08:06:58 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 07:40:06 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 References: <200604211034.k3LAY0TP096656@lurza.secnetix.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200604280740.06963.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1428/Thu Apr 27 14:39:31 2006 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: Francisco Reyes Subject: Re: What ever happened to Terasolutions? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:07:01 -0000 On Thursday 27 April 2006 07:03 pm, Francisco Reyes wrote: > Oliver Fromme writes: > > (In other words: PAE might enable you to use RAM >=3D 4 GB, > > but your processes will still be limited to 32bit address > > space.) > > Thanks for the pointer. > That is a good reason to go AMD64 if one has apps which will require lots > of RAM, although I can't think of any program I use ever needing 4GB+ for= a > single program. Well, part of the 4GB+ (1GB at least) is used for the kernel on i386, and part of the space is reserved for stack, etc. such that your effective mmap() limit is more like 2gb IIRC. If a process wanted to mmap a file bigger than 2gb (such as the backing store for a large SQL database) it would have to include its own memory mapper to only mmap a window of the file at a time, etc. With a larger virtual address space it can mmap the entire file without a problem. =2D-=20 John Baldwin =A0<>< =A0http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" =A0=3D =A0http://www.FreeBSD.org From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 29 15:54:08 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5D0D16A415 for ; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 15:54:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vvelox@vvelox.net) Received: from mail07.powweb.com (mail07.powweb.com [66.152.97.40]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6251643D6D for ; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 15:54:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from vvelox@vvelox.net) Received: from vixen42.vulpes (24-119-225-24.cpe.cableone.net [24.119.225.24]) by mail07.powweb.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC61914E16F for ; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 08:54:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:56:04 -0500 From: "Z.C.B." To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060429105604.6cc82966@vixen42.vulpes> In-Reply-To: <200604272227.09721.soralx@cydem.org> References: <200604270217.43493.soralx@cydem.org> <20060427184157.1e9bd094@vixen42.vulpes> <200604272227.09721.soralx@cydem.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.1.1 (GTK+ 2.8.17; i386-portbld-freebsd5.4) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: KMail to mbox X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 15:54:11 -0000 On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:27:09 -0700 soralx@cydem.org wrote: > > > > Anyone got an idea how to convert KMail's ~/Mail/* to standard > > > mboxes? > > It is most likely using either MH or Maildir. I honestly suggest > > leaving it as that and forgeting about the evilness that is mbox, > > but if you want to, there are a few ports in the ports tree that > > should be useful. > > The complication is that the filthy KMail saves message flags in > some 'index' files (instead of in message headers). All I want to > do really is to convert these into any standard format, such as > mbox (what's evil about it, BTW?) for use with some normal mail > client (Sylpheed probably). Message flags? What do you mean by this? As in if it has been read or not? If that is the case, there is no actual method outside of maildir for this. In maildir a message is new if it has is in the new directory. Upon reading it should be moved to the cur directory. Sylpheed and sylpheed-claws uses MH. Mbox is fine till it starts getting large. It is easily corrupted. It requires locking and the like. More than one program can not safely access it. MH solves these a bit, but maildir fixes them completely. MH has every message in a single folder and numbered. Maildir has each one named in a manner to remove collision and uses three directories. These are tmp, cur, and new. The message is writen to tmp at first. Then it is moved to new. Upon reading it is moved to cur. You may not notice how nice maildir till you admin your first mail server. This is especially true if you have dialup customers and are using sendmail. If you are using webmail you are even more screwed with mbox.