backtrace on current..
FYI - newly installed: ugen1.2: at usbus1 uhub2 on uhub0 uhub2: on usbus1 ugen0.2: at usbus0 uhub3 on uhub1 uhub3: on usbus0 uhub2: 8 ports with 8 removable, self powered uhub3: 6 ports with 6 removable, self powered ugen1.3: at usbus1 ukbd0 on uhub2 ukbd0: on usbus1 kbd2 at ukbd0 ugen1.4: at usbus1 umass0 on uhub2 umass0: on usbus1 umass0: SCSI over Bulk-Only; quirks = 0x4100 umass0:4:0: Attached to scbus4 ugen1.5: at usbus1 umass1 on uhub2 umass1: on usbus1 umass1: SCSI over Bulk-Only; quirks = 0x8100 umass1:5:1: Attached to scbus5 (probe0:umass-sim0:0:0:0): REPORT LUNS. CDB: a0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 10 00 00 (probe0:umass-sim0:0:0:0): CAM status: SCSI Status Error (probe0:umass-sim0:0:0:0): SCSI status: Check Condition (probe0:umass-sim0:0:0:0): SCSI sense: ILLEGAL REQUEST asc:20,0 (Invalid command operation code) (probe0:umass-sim0:0:0:0): Error 22, Unretryable error da1 at umass-sim1 bus 1 scbus5 target 0 lun 0 da1: Removable Direct Access SPC-4 SCSI device da1: Serial Number 60A44C3FACC9FE118997019C da1: 40.000MB/s transfers da1: 29510MB (60437492 512 byte sectors) da1: quirks=0x2 Trying to mount root from ufs:/dev/da0p2 []... WARNING: WITNESS option enabled, expect reduced performance. da0 at umass-sim0 bus 0 scbus4 target 0 lun 0 da0: Fixed Direct Access SPC-4 SCSI device da0: Serial Number da0: 40.000MB/s transfers da0: 5723166MB (11721043968 512 byte sectors) da0: quirks=0x2 lock order reversal: 1st 0xf80004f77608 ufs (ufs) @ /usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_lookup.c:713 2nd 0xfe80edc0 bufwait (bufwait) @ /usr/src/sys/ufs/ffs/ffs_vnops.c:283 3rd 0xf80006aff248 ufs (ufs) @ /usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_subr.c:2598 stack backtrace: #0 0x80c48773 at witness_debugger+0x73 #1 0x80c484bd at witness_checkorder+0xa7d #2 0x80bb45dd at lockmgr_xlock_hard+0x6d #3 0x80bb505e at __lockmgr_args+0x5fe #4 0x80ef4365 at ffs_lock+0xa5 #5 0x81236d93 at VOP_LOCK1_APV+0x63 #6 0x80cc3715 at _vn_lock+0x65 #7 0x80cb1ee6 at vget+0x66 #8 0x80ca3fcc at vfs_hash_get+0xcc #9 0x80eefc4f at ffs_vgetf+0x3f #10 0x80ee5a32 at softdep_sync_buf+0xb62 #11 0x80ef5124 at ffs_syncvnode+0x234 #12 0x80ecad66 at ffs_truncate+0x716 #13 0x80efc909 at ufs_direnter+0x609 #14 0x80f055dd at ufs_makeinode+0x5fd #15 0x80f01544 at ufs_create+0x34 #16 0x81234b30 at VOP_CREATE_APV+0x60 #17 0x80cc301f at vn_open_cred+0x2cf random: unblocking device. lo0: link state changed to UP em0: link state changed to UP ums0 on uhub2 ums0: on usbus1 ums0: 5 buttons and [XYZ] coordinates ID=1 Security policy loaded: MAC/ntpd (mac_ntpd) root@colossus:~ # uname -a FreeBSD colossus.isux.com 13.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 13.0-CURRENT r346979 GENERIC amd64 root@colossus:~ # -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: drm / drm2 removal in 12
blubee blubeeme wrote: On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 10:04 AM Mark Linimon wrote: On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 07:07:24AM +0800, blubee blubeeme wrote: Are these guys insane and please avoid the nonsense about you're doing this in your spare time. Let us know how whatever OS you wind up using instead works for you. I suggest you look for one that will put up with your constant harangues. There are very few people on the mailing lists as nasty and rude as yourself. It is tiresome, demotivating, and childish. Please go elsewhere. mcl Your opinion has been noted but this issue isn't about me. It's about the Graphics devs coding themselves into a corner and looking for an easy button so they can continue to feel good about their toy. There's a reason the changes they tried to force down the FreeBSD source tree was reverted; It does not meet any standards of quality. I have no inside knowledge other than my ability to think clearly and it's obvious that The FreeBSD team wanted to hint at them that their code doesn't pass the sniff test. Instead of being whiny brats improve your code and have it work without breaking compatibility with what has been working for quite a long time. Here's the play by play; You guys push this mess contaminating the FreeBSD source tree, some long standing user tries to update their machines and it blows up; 1) Most will just leave 2) Some will complain 2a) You guys will say; Read UPDATING. bleh bleh blen They'll get aggravated, thereby aggravating people who came to this platform for Stability. Users who actually use FreeBSD to get things done do not time to trawl these mailing lists, they have real world problems to solve with real world constraints. There are OS with kqueue and all those things it's called Linux; You can go there and play w/ that stuff to your hearts content. If you want your code to get merged, make sure it follows the guidelines and not break the systems for people who are already using the platform. Now, I understand hearing harsh criticism about your work might hurt your feelings and all but here's the antidote; work harder, improve your code, try again when your code quality improves. You guys cannot expect people to accept these kludges in their systems that they run everyday. It's an open source project, you can't get mad because your code isn't accepted, it's your jobs and engineers to do better not expect users to jump through hoops to accommodate your subpar attempts at coding. This isn't about me, it's about the quality of code that you guys are trying to submit. Not much to disagree with what you say here.. because that's why I no longer work on using FreeBSD instead having created my own fork which is something I can call stable, that can be patched for security issues and something that is usable across my environment. The one thing who you should be aware of and what I do disagree with you over is who you are speaking to ML is a long standing 'old hat' of FreeBSD and someone I respect and I know would not be putting 'kludges' and substandard code into the trees... Direct your anger elsewhere, whilst still making valid points. Regards, Michelle -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD Quarterly Status Report - First Quarter 2016 (fwd)
Warren Block wrote: Introduction The first quarter of 2016 showed that FreeBSD retains a strong sense of ipseity. Improvements were pervasive, lending credence to the concept of meliorism. Panegyrics are relatively scarce, but not for lack of need. Perhaps this missive might serve that function in some infinitesimal way. There was propagation, reformation, randomization, accumulation, emulation, transmogrification, debuggenation, and metaphrasal during this quarter. In the financioartistic arena, pork snout futures narrowly edged out pointilism, while parietal art remained fixed. In all, a discomfiture of abundance. View the rubrics below, and marvel at their profusion and magnitude! Marvel! You're trolling right? -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: UEFI Boot fails if legacy mode is disabled completely in settings on ASUS Z87 board
Dominik Zajac wrote: > Hi, > > on an ASUS Z87 Pro board, the UEFI boot media only work if the CSM mode > in the Settings of the UEFI are set to "both". This means it is using > UEFI boot and CSM mode for legacy booting. > > If I disable the legacy CSM and configure "UEFI only", the UEFI loader > still loads but when it comes to load the kernel it just stops and the > system is frozen at that point. Same with 10.1 and 11-current USB > install media. > > The system now has FreeBSD 10.1 on one disc installed with UEFI mode and > boots with it as long as the CSM compatibility mode is enabled. > > Has someone a similar problem or behaviour? > Same Mobo, same problem here. > This leads me to the next question. How can I debug or get more > information what fails at this stage of the boot process? I would like > to provide more detailed information and help to debug to hunt this bug > down. > Sorry - I can't help here, I don't have time to debug as too busy fixing broken systems from Sept 1 changes. -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool
Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> The ports tree has been modified to only support pkg(8) as package management >> system for all supported version of FreeBSD. >> >> if you were still using pkg_install (pkg_* tools) you will have to upgrade >> your >> system. >> >> The simplest way is >> cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg >> make install >> then run >> pkg2ng >> >> So despite being told 'use the quarterly, patches can be applied to it if requested' and updating ports I maintain asking specifically for the patches to be merged... Still all broken (though patches applied to HEAD)... Nice one... -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool
Mathieu Arnold wrote: > +--On 3 septembre 2014 16:36:29 +0200 Michelle Sullivan > wrote: > | Mathieu Arnold wrote: > |> I still don't see what you have to say about what EOL mean, it's *End Of > |> Life* meaning after, it is dead, and won't exist any more. > |> > |> > | Ahh so all those Windows XP servers are dead and don't work anymore... > > Not at all, but you don't update them any more. > > Actually you do, but it does nothing... just like freebsd-update on any EOL release... Microsoft didn't release a patch that would change the base system so you can no longer install any software... They just stopped providing updates, then later stopped providing security updates. -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool
Mathieu Arnold wrote: > I still don't see what you have to say about what EOL mean, it's *End Of > Life* meaning after, it is dead, and won't exist any more. > > Ahh so all those Windows XP servers are dead and don't work anymore... -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool
Brandon Allbery wrote: > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Michelle Sullivan > wrote: > > >> This is my only option - however, I suspect I'm already f**ked - my >> build servers kicked off at 4am and the non pkg jails automatically >> converted themselves to pkg.. the pkg jails obviously continued... >> however I now have a repo that contains half pkg versions in the same >> directory structure and indexes as the pkg_install structure... >> >> > > So, the flip side of enterprise software management is that you probably > should not be integrating a rolling release like ports into what is > supposed to be a stable verified environment in the first place. > *Especially* not via cron jobs with no supervision. At the very least, your > jails should be working from a local ports tree (or packages via > poudriere), with cherry-picking of locally tested patches. > > The roll until they get a stable base (using Jenkins as the controller) - they've been rolling since a patch to DBIx-SearchBuilder (that I created and submitted), which out came the DBD::Pg update to 3.3.0 and the subsequent blacklisting of it for RT 4.x and then the tcl breakage around mid August until 2 days ago... So yeah not that stupid. -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool
Garrett Cooper wrote: >> On Sep 2, 2014, at 4:47, Michelle Sullivan wrote: >> >> Marcus von Appen wrote: >> >>> Alban Hertroys : >>> >>> >>>> I can totally understand that at some point it starts to get >>>> impossible to maintain two separate packaging systems and I understand >>>> that you think 2 years is enough time to shake things out, but >>>> software vendors aren't that quick. For many, 2 years is a short time. >>>> >>> It also should be noted that everyone had enough time to raise those >>> issues >>> in the time between tthe announcement and now. No one did. Now that it is >>> gone, they are brought up, while they should have been long time ago >>> instead. It can't work that way. >>> >>> My 2 cents in this discussion :-). >>> >> Actually I brought it up as soon as I found the EOL was a deadline for >> breaking pkg_* tools, was told, "too late now" - that was more than 2 >> weeks ago, less than 2 months ago (forget the date) ... I'm happy with >> an EOL and working to upgrade everything, I'm not happy that the EOL was >> not actually an EOL and it was actually a deadline. >> > > Hi Michelle, > One subtle point that I wanted to ask for clarification is you thought > the EOL announcement for pkg_install was going to be "pkg_install is no > longer going to be supported, but you can still use it", instead of > "pkg_install support is going to be removed from the tree" -- is that correct? > 100% correct! (thank you for being one of the few to see the subtle but *very* important difference) > You'd probably hate to do this, but forking the sources and changing from > portsnap to a git or svn backed ports tree that downloads a tarball snapshot > might be the best resolution to this issue now... > This is my only option - however, I suspect I'm already f**ked - my build servers kicked off at 4am and the non pkg jails automatically converted themselves to pkg.. the pkg jails obviously continued... however I now have a repo that contains half pkg versions in the same directory structure and indexes as the pkg_install structure... Time to rebuild everything from scratch I think - second time in a year.. I'm guessing my boss is going to tell me, use RPM, no wasting more time on it... only time will tell... you'll know the result if you see future posts and patches from me. Michelle -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool
Marcus von Appen wrote: > Alban Hertroys : > >> >> I can totally understand that at some point it starts to get >> impossible to maintain two separate packaging systems and I understand >> that you think 2 years is enough time to shake things out, but >> software vendors aren't that quick. For many, 2 years is a short time. >> > > It also should be noted that everyone had enough time to raise those > issues > in the time between tthe announcement and now. No one did. Now that it is > gone, they are brought up, while they should have been long time ago > instead. It can't work that way. > > My 2 cents in this discussion :-). Actually I brought it up as soon as I found the EOL was a deadline for breaking pkg_* tools, was told, "too late now" - that was more than 2 weeks ago, less than 2 months ago (forget the date) ... I'm happy with an EOL and working to upgrade everything, I'm not happy that the EOL was not actually an EOL and it was actually a deadline. -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool
Andrew Berg wrote: > On 2014.09.01 22:09, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > >> That's my point - there was a patch waiting to submit that knowingly >> broke pkg_install at midnight on the day after the EOL... the EOL >> shouldn't be an EOL - because it was really a 'portsnap after this date >> before you upgrade and you're screwed it won't work any more at all...' >> > As Peter outlined, this EOL was announced long ago, and it was mentioned at > least once that it was to allow breaking changes. There really would be no > reason to drop support for it in the ports tree if there were no plans to make > changes. > The point is the EOL was not an EOL, it was a deadline, either switch or you're screwed, and it was communicated as an EOL not as a "here's a deadline, switch or you're screwed" -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool
Andrew Berg wrote: > On 2014.09.01 21:27, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > >> Actually it's an inconvenience for someone like me and you. Not for >> many freebsd users, and certainly not for me 6 months ago if I hadn't >> been writing my own ports oh and what was it, 1.3.6 -> 1.3.7? broke >> shit... (badly) ... >> > There were instructions for upgrading 1.3.6 to 1.3.7 alongside a notice that > things would not be good if the instructions were not followed and an > explanation of the issue. I think these kinds of notices need to reach more > people, but of course, that is easier said than done. > BTW, from what I have observed, 1.3.x issues have affected Poudriere users the > most, binary package users a bit less (but still significantly), and pure > ports > users very little. > I am a poudriere user... across 8.4, 9.0, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 10.0 on both i386 and amd64 :/ > >>> Also, 9.3 is out and the 9.2 EOL is not far away. Not sure why you would be >>> doing a new install with 9.2. >>> >>> >> Try getting yourself a FreeBSD server at Softlayer... They still >> install 7.x for Christ's sake (amongst others - but last time I checked, >> on new servers, 8.4, 9.0, 9.1, 10.0*) >> > Fair enough. > > >> (not had time - because an EOL message is not a 'It will not >> work after this date' message it is a 'you're unsupported after this >> date and things *might* not work as expected' >> > No, it means "we're not supporting this any more, so we don't care if there > are > new vulnerabilities or things stop working". I'm not going to dictate to other > people what their upgrade schedule should be, but anyone running unsupported > versions of software should not have any expectation that the ecosystem around > it will be accommodating. > That's my point - there was a patch waiting to submit that knowingly broke pkg_install at midnight on the day after the EOL... the EOL shouldn't be an EOL - because it was really a 'portsnap after this date before you upgrade and you're screwed it won't work any more at all...' > The ports tree already requires a lot work to make sure everything works on > supported versions of FreeBSD, and I see no reason whatsoever for anyone to > put > effort into making it work on EOL versions. > Some of us have production systems that span 6.0->10.0 (and most version in between) and are fighting fires with minimal help just trying to keep ahead -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool
Julian Elischer wrote: > > You should try arguing with someone like Bank of Americas security and > operations > department You work for the same company as me? > some day about whether they want to suddenly upgrade 300 machines > for no real reason (from their perspective). > -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool
Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: >> And for the portsnap users? >> >> >> > In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users. > Sure about that? > Portsnap is a tool that used to obtain a copy of the ports tree. > try this: portsnap fetch update && cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg && make install If you *haven't* install pkg first... > Portsnap is only one way, another way to get a copy of the ports tree is by > using subversion and checking it out by using the svn command. > Not much good if you haven't installed svn already... > pkg(8) is a package management tool, and to make use of most packages > having a copy of the ports tree is not required. > > Correct, take a 9.2 install disk, install it, portsnap and then install pkg on it... Oh wait, you can't.. pkg_install is broken, and 9.2 install disks don't have pkg in the BaseOS -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool
Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > Hi all, > > The ports tree has been modified to only support pkg(8) as package management > system for all supported version of FreeBSD. > > if you were still using pkg_install (pkg_* tools) you will have to upgrade > your > system. > > The simplest way is > cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg > make install > then run > pkg2ng > > You will have lots of warning, don't be scared, they are expected, pkg_* > databases used to get easily mangled. pkg2ng is most of the time able to deal > with it. > > If however you encounter a problem then please report to p...@freebsd.org > > A tag has been applied to the ports tree if you need to get the latest ports > tree before the EOL of pkg_install: > https://svn.FreeBSD.org/ports/tags/PKG_INSTALL_EOL > > A branch has been created if some committers want to provides updates on the > for pkg_install users: > https://svn.FreeBSD.org/ports/branches/pkg_install > > Please note that this branch is not officially maintained and that we strongly > recommend that you do migrate to pkg(8) > > Best regards, > Bapt on behalf of portmgr > And for the portsnap users? -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
