From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 23 23:33:51 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E33B16A4DA for ; Sun, 23 Jul 2006 23:33:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@dfwlp.com) Received: from zeus.int.dfwlp.com (zeus.dfwlp.com [208.11.134.127]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D232A43D46 for ; Sun, 23 Jul 2006 23:33:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd@dfwlp.com) Received: from athena.int.dfwlp.com (athena.int.dfwlp.com [192.168.125.83]) (authenticated bits=0) by zeus.int.dfwlp.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6NNXlB7062662 for ; Sun, 23 Jul 2006 18:33:49 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from freebsd@dfwlp.com) From: Jonathan Horne To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 18:33:46 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 References: <20060723231038.71D8143D6B@mx1.FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060723231038.71D8143D6B@mx1.FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200607231833.46900.freebsd@dfwlp.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on zeus.int.dfwlp.com Subject: Re: Temperature Monitor X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 23:33:51 -0000 On Sunday 23 July 2006 18:10, Tamouh H. wrote: > Beautiful! That did the trick. > > adding to the kernel: > > device =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0ichsmb > device =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0smb > device =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0smbus > device =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0intpm > > and then installing mbmon from source fixed it! out of curiosity and for the sake of scientific method, did you happen to d= o=20 the kernel adds and the try the port again to check failure, or did you do= =20 both and then check? just wondering, jonathan