Re: upcoming kfreebsd 9
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Robert, On 23.09.2011 22:26, Robert Millan wrote: > If it is, which combinations are possible and which aren't? Currently > I know that: > ... > - 9.x kernel can run with 8.x userland are you sure? I think I found such an incompatibility. I backported and compiled kfreebsd-9: ii kfreebsd-image-9.0-0-amd649.0~svn225873-1 kernel of FreeBSD 9.0 image and I am running it with an up to date Wheezy user land, hence libgeom1 has: # dpkg -l | grep "libgeom" ii libgeom0 8.1-5 FreeBSD GEOM library ii libgeom1 8.2+ds1-4 FreeBSD GEOM library This is the same version as Sid has, right now. This seems to cause an ABI incompatibility between libgeom and kfreebsd-9. Hence, update-grub fails. Some debugging output is on [1] (warning: 1.7M log). The actual problem seems to be grub-probe here which causes a lot of noise: # /usr/sbin/grub-probe --device /dev/da15s1 --target=fs_uuid [lots of similar messages stripped] Unexpected XML: name=stripesize data="0" Unexpected XML: name=stripeoffset data="131072" Unexpected XML: name=stripesize data="0" Unexpected XML: name=stripeoffset data="131072" f5cf45616b5c3c2b The problem seems minor, the file system uid appears nonetheless but confuses the grub scripts. Hence I tried wrapping "grub-probe" by: #! /bin/sh /usr/sbin/grub-probe.real $@ | tail -n1 As soon as I did, grub works fine again and generates a working grub.conf. Apparently libgeom fails to parse the output of "sysctl -b kern.geom.confxml" (output in [2]). [1] http://daemonkeeper.net/wp-content/files/grub.out [2] http://daemonkeeper.net/wp-content/files/sysctl.out - -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJOkKjjAAoJEMcrUe6dgPNthbMP/27ESPq/i+kVzNZ/i8GgYGkt MxaezV6hXmB2sewF0R6gf5/vX7UPm9yjAZdQDiQSWHZ35v3CK0RAtRbxRYf4v39Q pffE1DNxXY0moA6YfnvkLwXA8bBEAkMU3FIYwuAobUlDOwY6372xJrBFRRlhqGHx qmczCItLZFq970UzOSJ30axzaWc7k6bP32EFo+q41RHY2nr1rQu9MiiydvIQO57V 1D/tM1Xl+GBlCqhZv5Rj/gmoQ6RAeazd3/G+MzoI0UB2tS7cK5hZurxmOtxCCEJu r5/1dSnXixYGxN/vo3Wywaqh+qGLV6CKOctky9YYsYCqP6Lm72YEH07OO/OG1RuQ DA5f0Va54/iWoRh6KY4Q9h8GVbyR0RgUQ6+SlV7IEW7y8yhjwLJv8hXTdAVFE+zQ h7iR8ZZQParJ7FVstqkfUPYBFJXqkme25J5KOB+EeOq8RZ2kyGw8OmEaeKlOwFHe UZyJT+7fax6/blnGyeR5SJMFuYVR3iR/F2GUtzHE+tlsVw4Fyg1U84ITT2ly4dUe vdDGOAEXJrc+RF2feNvjNgV3/LgxTehx40lKU5QEf6cx589Ar60LiWpyRqI5r6KW 2BOjbVcj9cKxUs1F8qfSHvttvJtbHnhZi0MrIOE8vrYbvSa4wOdkKp/EtFyHA/OL QYWVXFSwfS+5KwGUQO3T =dReq -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e90a8e5.5040...@toell.net
Re: upcoming kfreebsd 9
2011/9/25 Petr Salinger : >> If it is, which combinations are possible and which aren't? Currently >> I know that: >> >> - 9.x kernel can be built with 8.x buildutils >> - 9.x kernel can run with 8.x userland >> >> But I don't know if the reverse are true. > > And that is exactly the reason for having them in experimental > and test possible combination. Makes sense. I would be very careful before moving them to sid though. > In ideal world, wheezy will release with 9.x kernel (and utilities) only, I don't agree with this. "Legacy" releases *are* meant for production. And they're more mature/stable than "Production" releases. I think it's good for end users that they can choose (note: Debian has given this choice for Linux a number of times, e.g. v2.4 / v2.6). > but it will be capable to run under squeeze 8.1 kernel correctly. If you're concerned about upgrades, in upstream "Rebuilding world" document kernel is updated first. Shouldn't we do the same? Different upgrade path may expose different problems. -- Robert Millan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caofdtxoiytxmtdpcpmcu91x3ufn1w+f7dwtrc0sxwakjkuw...@mail.gmail.com
Re: upcoming kfreebsd 9
Even during RC series it should stay in experimental. And with ABI number 0? IMHO, yes, for experimental it does not matter. But may be it is time to consider putting into experimental also freebsd-buildutils/freebsd-libs/freebsd-utils/kfreebsd-kernel-headers/... I think there should be a clear plan wrt 8.x and 9.x before doing that. Using 9.x userland in Wheezy might rule out the possibility of supporting 8.x kernels. First of all, is it desireable to support two branches? In Squeeze they weren't, but I think it'd be interesting if they would. If it is, which combinations are possible and which aren't? Currently I know that: - 9.x kernel can be built with 8.x buildutils - 9.x kernel can run with 8.x userland But I don't know if the reverse are true. And that is exactly the reason for having them in experimental and test possible combination. In ideal world, wheezy will release with 9.x kernel (and utilities) only, but it will be capable to run under squeeze 8.1 kernel correctly. Petr -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/alpine.lrh.2.02.1109251008550.7...@sci.felk.cvut.cz
Re: upcoming kfreebsd 9
On Fri, 23 Sep 2011, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/9/23 Petr Salinger : Even during RC series it should stay in experimental. And with ABI number 0? Mail on freebsd lists in the past couple days (I just read it today, but was a bit behind) indicates that there will be ABI bumps yet before 9.0 releases. -Ben Kaduk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/alpine.gso.1.10.1109242214490@multics.mit.edu
Re: upcoming kfreebsd 9
2011/9/23 Petr Salinger : > Even during RC series it should stay in experimental. And with ABI number 0? > But may be it is time to consider putting into experimental also > freebsd-buildutils/freebsd-libs/freebsd-utils/kfreebsd-kernel-headers/... I think there should be a clear plan wrt 8.x and 9.x before doing that. Using 9.x userland in Wheezy might rule out the possibility of supporting 8.x kernels. First of all, is it desireable to support two branches? In Squeeze they weren't, but I think it'd be interesting if they would. If it is, which combinations are possible and which aren't? Currently I know that: - 9.x kernel can be built with 8.x buildutils - 9.x kernel can run with 8.x userland But I don't know if the reverse are true. -- Robert Millan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOfDtXNM9W=zwyb93whr+gigogwpoo+eqv2ukm0ghrkzmvy...@mail.gmail.com
upcoming kfreebsd 9
Btw, this opens a few questions. Now that 9.x has been branched: - Should we put it in sid already? - If we do, should we allow it to migrate to wheezy? - Should we consider ABI stable and hence bump it to 1? Even during RC series it should stay in experimental. But may be it is time to consider putting into experimental also freebsd-buildutils/freebsd-libs/freebsd-utils/kfreebsd-kernel-headers/... Petr -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/alpine.lrh.2.02.1109232134570.3...@sci.felk.cvut.cz
