[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: panic: pmap_enter: no pv entries available



On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 12:56:45PM +0200, Alex de Joode wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 02:49:28AM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 02:05:53AM +0200, Alex de Joode wrote:
> > > There is bug somewhere in openbsd/ipf 3.{0,1} 
> > OpenBSD 3.{0,1} with IPF does not exist.
> Well sorry to inform you, but there exist a version of
> OpenBSD that ships with ipf instead of pf. It is not
> 'Official OpenBSD' but none the less OpenBSD.

You must be utterly learning resistant.
This is not OpenBSD.

> > finally get it. ipf lacks memory limits.
> > not our problem. 
> Well I was not hinting at an solution by the friendly but
> busy OpenBSD developers. I was mearly pointing out to the
> previous poster that OpenBSD and IPF has a serious fatal 
> bug and that something simmilar might be the result of his
> crashes.

blah blah blah. we've been pretty clear.

> A wise man only uses OpenBSD with a generic kernel, only the 
> stupid and brave try OpenBSD with customised stuff. Any 6 year
> old will see that if they read the list for a week orso.

No. I run custom kernels also where needed or where the advantages outweight
the drawbacks.
Whoever, I don't whine if that doesn't work but fix the problems myself or
revert to GENERIC.

> Anyways I'll leave the flamefest to Art and Theo, they are much
> more experienced in that area. I would however like to see some
> clarification about OpenBSD and derived products in the FAQ, if 
> possible. Can for instance the OpenBSD+IPF images Darren Reed
> produces be called OpenBSD(+IPF) ? 

No. That is not OpenBSD. Call it DarrenBSD or whatever you like.

> Debian makes a distinction between 'Debian Official Use' and
> 'Debian Open Use' for their logo, [http://www.debian.org/logos/]
> and implicitly grant permission to call derived works also Debian.

You lost Track even more. This is OpenBSD. Not DebianBSD or whatever.