Date: Fri, 31 Mar 1995 16:10:10 -0700 (MST) From: Brad Midgley <brad@pht.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: What happened to my include files!@# Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.950331154216.367I-100000@exodus.pht.com> In-Reply-To: <1807.796605960@freefall.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> At this point, the number of errors in 950322-SNAP has exceeded what I
> believe to be acceptable in a snapshot.
>
> How do the rest of -hackers feel?
I think the installation does have a bit to be desired, but it wasn't too
hard to figure out after watching the list and poking around the system a
bit. As long as anyone who is going to try it is on the mailing list, let's
just summarize all the little fixes and watch for the next snap or better yet
2.1.
The one thing which did give me an unpleasant surprise was the necessity
to configure the system with
options "NMBCLUSTERS=1024"
even after I'd defined maxusers as 64. It would be very nice to not have
to know an obscure option like this--is there no way NMBCLUSTERS could be
computed from maxusers like some other table sizes are?
And while I'm on the subject, is it safe for maxusers to be larger than
64? v2.0 gave me a warning when I set it any higher. What does
ftp.cdrom.com run with?
Overall, the system is very stable which is the biggest thing I was watching
for (esp. compared with vanilla 2.0 which we were struggling with before.) I
look forward to having it on cdrom so I can try it at home too.
BTW, I'm curious. What does this message mean?
in-rtqtimo: adjusted rtq_reallyold to 2400
(then 1600, 1066, 710, then I think it stopped adjusting)
brad@pht.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.3.91.950331154216.367I-100000>