From owner-freebsd-current Sun Dec 27 21:18:30 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA22641 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sun, 27 Dec 1998 21:18:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from spinner.netplex.com.au (spinner.netplex.com.au [202.12.86.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA22634 for ; Sun, 27 Dec 1998 21:18:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au) Received: from spinner.netplex.com.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spinner.netplex.com.au (8.9.1/8.9.1/Netplex) with ESMTP id NAA62889; Mon, 28 Dec 1998 13:17:47 +0800 (WST) (envelope-from peter@spinner.netplex.com.au) Message-Id: <199812280517.NAA62889@spinner.netplex.com.au> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Kenneth Wayne Culver cc: Bill Fumerola , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: So we're stuck with using timidity now? In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 28 Dec 1998 00:04:33 EST." Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 13:17:47 +0800 From: Peter Wemm Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote: > > > Like I said before... Just use OSS/FreeBSD... It is better than VoxWare > > > anyway. And with some talking to Dev at 4-front tech, I'm sure an > > > agreement could be made. > > > > OSS is better. Better at panicing my system. Lets use the homegrown > > solutions before we start implementing a _known_ buggy module. > > Are you using the newest OSS? Also, Dev at 4-front tech has told me that > the problem with his software panicing the kernel is because of problems > with FreeBSD's virtual memory system. So do we need to fix that, or do we > need to make Dev find a non-existant workaround (he has already looked for > one)?? I think that problem has been fixed, a month or two ago. contigmalloc() was doing some silly things. > Kenneth Culver Cheers, -Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message