Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 01:42:55PM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 10:41:49AM -0800, Gary Kline wrote: > > I didn't move until 5 until 5.2+; it was a major move. > > There were lots of things to get-right. So maybe by > > 6.5, 6 will be granite stable. > > (Disclaimer: I am not on re@ but I do watch the bugs come in as one of > the bugmasters). > > We completely redid the way we did release engineering between the 5.X > series and 6.X series to avoid ever inflicting that much pain again. > > The jump from 5.2 to 5.3 was huge and we learned many things not to do. > The jump from 5.3 to 5.4 was pretty minor -- but so is the jump from > 5.4 to 6.0. The emphasis was on a smaller feature set and a much longer > (painfully long :-) ) period of QA. The win for me with 5.2.1 last summer was tha it finally let me begin to get my ThinkPad 600E working. 5.3 may have been required to bring the bizarre sound chip to life. It's got some some kind of microsoft idiosyncrasy. I'm at .3-STABLE everywhere and now moving cautiously to .4. YES to your smaller jumps. If memory serves, we made two fairly hard moves. First from 2.x.y to 3.x to get rid of a.out; then 4.x to 5.x for the new filesystem paradigm. I can see anything beyond the i868 being in the 64-bit world; (*sigh*) :-) > > The result in the PR database is that for 6.0 vs 5.4, although there > are a number of regressions (in particular, certain i386 hardware), the > number of entries is far, far, less than for the 5.2.1 to 5.3 transition. > > So I would urge people to change their view of 6.0. From what I can > tell it's one of our strongest releases. It certainly must be the > strongest .0 release. > > In any case, I don't believe there are going to be .5 and .6 releases > going forwards. This will keep us, in the future, from spending so > much time on MFCs. I'm still planning on not upping to 6 until 6.2 or better. Not unless 6.0/.1 has absolutely push-button audio so I can play real, mp3, m3u, ogg, windows-audio/whatever! > > Some of this background is further detailed in an article I wrote: > > http://www.FreeBSD.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/version-guide/past-schedules.html > > I hope that people will find the information there useful. Good one! thanks for putting that together. == Q == Does anybody know why there is no article.freebsd.org v-site that people could find stuff like this more easily? It probab;y could be done with a link/symlink and a DNS entry for the virtual website. gary > > And, if someone ever wants to write that 5.X vs 6.X vs 7.X feature list > comparison, now would be a good time :-) > > mcl -- Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public service Unix ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 02:59:09PM + I heard the voice of Joao Barros, and lo! it spake thus: > > There have been some questions on the lists about what to expect > from release x.y and I personnally have always looked at the TODO > list like http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/todo.html It's always been my impression that the todo list is put together as we close in on a release as a "these things still need to get done". It's not really a "here are the things this release offers over the previous one"... -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
> Gary Kline wrote: > > Are you volunteering to post the TODO lists here on -stable > > every N months? I think it's a great idea to have some > > clues about where we're going, or hope to be going. No I am not. But you are right on the "it's a great idea to have some clues about where we're going, or hope to be going" part. That was my point. On 12/16/05, Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The release TODO list is maintained on the FreeBSD.org website, As I pointed, available for anyone interested in knowing what's going on. > though > it's usually only active during release cycles. Yes, but until that time only by reading yours and other Dev's answers to the same questions one knows where a Release is heading. The users know what to expect and the Dev's know what they set themselfes to do :-) -- Joao Barros ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
Kevin Oberman writes: > [...] > No. There is no conflict between Cx states and EST. Cx states specifies > how deeply the CPU will sleep when idle. EST controls processor speed > and voltage. In most cases, your REALLY want to use both of these. They > are very significant in saving power. (Of course, USB tends to limit the > effectiveness of Cx states. I need to run without USB to get really good > battery life and to make suspend (S3) really ut power drain. Can you expand a bit on that "Of course USB...". What's the problem with USB? Can one just kunload it before suspend? g. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Need help with crash analysis
I have a Dell Inspiron 9100 laptop that has been crashing lately. It seems to happen when there is a moderate disk load and the network load is > 6 Mbits/sec. I can usually replicate it by running "portsdb -fUu" while downloading or copying large files across the network. I have tried the following in an attempt to isolate the problem, but nothing has worked. * disabling ACPI * disabling hyperthreading * disabling SMP * switching back to the 4BSD scheduler from ULE I ran kgdb against kernel.debug and the crash dump, but don't quite know how to interpret it or where to go from here. I've attached my kernel config file, dmesg.boot, and the outputs from kldstat and kgdb. I recently upgraded my router/access point at home from 802.11b to 802.11g to take advantage of the faster network cards in my laptops and I am wondering if that could be exposing a bug or race condition. I tried putting my network card back in 11b mode (instead of 11g) and I don't see the problem nearly as often. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how to troubleshoot this further? I have saved the relevant kernel files and crash dumps, in case I need to reference them again. -- Peter D. Quilty [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-906-5633 GnuPG Key: http://users.adelphia.net/~pdquilty/gpg-pubkey.asc GnuPG Key Fingerprint: A46A 0E56 D13E 5617 4696 2B04 0D0C E34D CB6D D107 makeoptions DEBUG=-g machine i386 cpu I686_CPU ident "PDQ.9100" options INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE options ROOTDEVNAME=\"ufs:ad0s1a\" options SMP options SCHED_ULE options PREEMPTION options MPTABLE_FORCE_HTT options IPI_PREEMPTION options INET options FFS options SOFTUPDATES options UFS_DIRHASH options MSDOSFS options SMBFS options CD9660 options PROCFS options PSEUDOFS options COMPAT_LINUX options LINPROCFS options COMPAT_43 options KTRACE options SYSVSHM options SYSVMSG options SYSVSEM options _KPOSIX_PRIORITY_SCHEDULING options KBD_INSTALL_CDEV options ADAPTIVE_GIANT options NETSMB options NETSMBCRYPTO options LIBMCHAIN options LIBICONV device apic device isa device pci device ata device atadisk device atapicd device atapicam options ATA_STATIC_ID device scbus device da device cd device pass device atkbdc device atkbd device psm device vga device splash device sc device npx device pmtimer device cbb device pccard device cardbus device sio device miibus device bfe device wlan device wlan_wep device ath_hal device ath_rate_sample device ath device loop device mem device io device random device ether device pty device snp device bpf device uhci device ehci device usb device umass device ums device firewire device sbp device sound device snd_ich Copyright (c) 1992-2005 The FreeBSD Project. Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE #16: Wed Dec 14 14:34:52 EST 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PDQ.9100 ACPI APIC Table: Timecounter "i8254" frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz (2992.51-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0xf29 Stepping = 9 Features=0xbfebfbff Features2=0x4400> Hyperthreading: 2 logical CPUs real memory = 1073389568 (1023 MB) avail memory = 1041309696 (993 MB) FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1 ioapic0: Changing APIC ID to 2 ioapic0 irqs 0-23 on motherboard netsmb_dev: loaded kqemu version 0x00010200 kqemu: KQEMU installed, max_instances=4 max_locked_mem=129932kB. ath_hal: 0.9.14.9 (AR5210, AR5211, AR5212, RF5111, RF5112, RF2413) npx0: [FAST] npx0: on motherboard npx0: INT 16 interface acpi0: on motherboard pci_link0: irq 11 on acpi0 pci_link1: irq 11 on acpi0 pci_link2: irq 11 on acpi0 pci_link3: irq 11 on acpi0 pci_link4: on acpi0 pci_link5: irq 11 on acpi0 Timecounter "ACPI-fast" frequency 3579545 Hz quality 1000 acpi_timer0: <24-bit timer at 3.579545MHz> port 0x1008-0x100b on acpi0 cpu0: on acpi0 acpi_throttle0: on cpu0 cpu1: on acpi0 acpi_throttle1: on cpu1 acpi_throttle1: failed to attach P_CNT device_attach: acpi_throttle1 attach returned 6 acpi_acad0: on acpi0 battery0: on acpi0 acpi_lid0: on acpi0 acpi_button0: on acpi0 acpi_button1: on acpi0 pcib0: port 0xcf8-0xcff
Re: Diskless /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Cannot execute objects on /
On 12/17/05 06:25, Mike Andrews wrote: On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Paulo Fragoso wrote: After upgrade from FreeBSD 5.3 to FREEBSD_5_4 (cvs), our diskless machines didn't work correctly, many applications using dynamic libraries didn't start, this error was showed: /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Cannot execute objects on / We had the same problem with our netboot cluster, and going from RELENG_5_4 (5.4-RELEASE) up to RELENG_5 (5-STABLE) fixed it. Confirmed. This problem was fixed shortly after 5.4-RELEASE. I'm running a 5.4 from Aug 22, and it has the fix in it. If you need the precise patch, you should be able to search the archives from August and find it. Cheers, /Johny -- Johny Mattsson - Making IT work ,-. ,-. ,-. When all else fails, http://www.earthmagic.org _.' `-' `-' Murphy's Law still works! ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 06:31:17AM -0500, Scott Robbins wrote: > I have to add my vote for 6, as did someone else in an earlier post. > Like some others, I always found 5.x a bit slower than 4.x (No > benchmarks, completely subjective.) From the very beginning, I've found > 6.x to be stable and quickly moved some non-critical servers to it. I will add my me too here. I move my home computer to 6.0 when I get back a connexion at home. My office computer used to seem far faster than my home one (quite normal for a 3.2 GHz PIV against an Athlon 1800+, with twice memory) but after some weeks of 6.0 on my Athlon and _many_ ports building (mostly because of the damned f*** last OCaml release) the relative difference seems far less impressive. This also quite subjective, but my feeling is that speed impressions is as important as real speed improvements, at least for workstation. Just note that my actual usage is only LaTeX (PhD writing ... ) and ports building. This was my 2 cents. -- Marwan Burelle, http://www.lri.fr/~burelle ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) http://www.cduce.org pgp9QyPpZGrIm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Friday 16 December 2005 21:45, Peter Jeremy wrote: > EST - Enhanced SpeedStep > TM2 - Thermal Monitor 2 Hm, guess I'll play with mbmon to see if this shows more then one monitor (assuming the 2 is the number of, not the protocol version). > >-pci0: at device 29.7 (no driver attached) > >+ehci0: mem > >0xf4fffc00-0xf4ff irq 11 at device 29.7 on pci0 > >+ehci0: [GIANT-LOCKED] > > > >Kudos! > > I'm still trying to get my USB2 to do anything more than probe :-( Ouch, well guess I'll have to find that memory stick I should have around here somewhere. > >-Timecounter "TSC" frequency 1398819442 Hz quality 800 > >-Timecounters tick every 10.000 msec > >+Timecounter "TSC" frequency 1398819606 Hz quality 800 > >+Timecounters tick every 1.000 msec > > > >Q: This is a big scarey difference :p This isn't a printf bug I presume? > > Which bit? The TSC is notoriously unstable and a relative change of > 1.2e-7 can be ignored. If you look at kern.clockrate, you'll see that > hz now defaults to 1000. Ah! That explains why rtc was complaining on 5.x but magically stopped doing that on 6. > >-acd0: CDRW at ata1-master PIO4 > >+acd0: CDRW at ata1-master UDMA33 > > > >That's *very* nice! > > Again, that's just a change in defaults. Problems were found with DMA to > ATAPI devices so the decision was made to default to PIO4 in 5.x. You can > set hw.ata.atapi_dma to 1 in 5.x if you want to (see acd(4)). Problems as in long waits on `burncd blank` and subsequent i/o errors and unmountable disks that disappear after reboot? -- Melvyn Sopacua [EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE Qt: 3.3.5 KDE: 3.4.3 ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: indefinite wait buffer: Does this indicate hardware issue?
On Sat, 2005-Dec-17 04:06:36 +0800, Xin LI wrote: >No, it's sometimes other, and is quite infrequent. On the other hand, >neither SMART nor error has reported some incident, so I was stuck >when looking on hardware issues, as the message does not indicate >which disk(s) may have problem... A hardware error should have been reported as such. But if you suspect a disk problem, try dd'ing the swap partition (or the whole disk) to /dev/null. If you can read the whole partition, you can probably write to it. (Or you could dd /dev/zero to the partitions whilst swap is not attached - eg in single user after boot). If you suspect retries are a problem, monitor the I/O rate with iostat or systat and see if it suddenly drops. -- Peter Jeremy ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 14:29:39 -0600 > From: Craig Boston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -cpu0: on acpi0 > > +cpu0: on acpi0 > > > > Q: Guessing that's a formatting difference, rather then 6.x not recognizing > > the states (sysctl hw.acpi.cpu.cx_supported confirms 4 states) > > Not sure on this, but you're probably better off using EST anyway as I > think it gives you more control over the processor frequency. No. There is no conflict between Cx states and EST. Cx states specifies how deeply the CPU will sleep when idle. EST controls processor speed and voltage. In most cases, your REALLY want to use both of these. They are very significant in saving power. (Of course, USB tends to limit the effectiveness of Cx states. I need to run without USB to get really good battery life and to make suspend (S3) really ut power drain. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: +1 510 486-8634 ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Fri, 2005-Dec-16 21:20:44 +0100, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: >Features=0xa7e9f9bf >+ Features2=0x180 > >Q: What are those extra features and are they useful? ;-) This is just printing out the CPU features bitmasks. The difference is that the CPU identification code in 6.x looks at the bitmap returned in %ecx after a cpuid 1. The features were always there, 6.x just prints them out. As for usefulness... EST - Enhanced SpeedStep TM2 - Thermal Monitor 2 >+uhci0: [GIANT-LOCKED] >+uhci1: [GIANT-LOCKED] >+uhci2: [GIANT-LOCKED] > >Q: Again - is this formatting or are these (and the ones below) still under >Giant in 6.x but not in 5.x? No. 6.x is just more verbose. I thought these had all been hidden behind 'verbose' as they are primarily hints to the developers. >-pci0: at device 29.7 (no driver attached) >+ehci0: mem >0xf4fffc00-0xf4ff irq 11 at device 29.7 on pci0 >+ehci0: [GIANT-LOCKED] > >Kudos! I'm still trying to get my USB2 to do anything more than probe :-( >-Timecounter "TSC" frequency 1398819442 Hz quality 800 >-Timecounters tick every 10.000 msec >+Timecounter "TSC" frequency 1398819606 Hz quality 800 >+Timecounters tick every 1.000 msec > >Q: This is a big scarey difference :p This isn't a printf bug I presume? Which bit? The TSC is notoriously unstable and a relative change of 1.2e-7 can be ignored. If you look at kern.clockrate, you'll see that hz now defaults to 1000. >-acd0: CDRW at ata1-master PIO4 >+acd0: CDRW at ata1-master UDMA33 > >That's *very* nice! Again, that's just a change in defaults. Problems were found with DMA to ATAPI devices so the decision was made to default to PIO4 in 5.x. You can set hw.ata.atapi_dma to 1 in 5.x if you want to (see acd(4)). -- Peter Jeremy ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 09:20:44PM +0100, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: > + Features2=0x180 > > Q: What are those extra features and are they useful? ;-) Enhanced Speedstep and Thermal Management. They're useful if you want to use powerd to conserve power / reduce heat generation. (load the cpufreq driver and look in sysctl dev.cpu) > -cpu0: on acpi0 > +cpu0: on acpi0 > > Q: Guessing that's a formatting difference, rather then 6.x not recognizing > the states (sysctl hw.acpi.cpu.cx_supported confirms 4 states) Not sure on this, but you're probably better off using EST anyway as I think it gives you more control over the processor frequency. > +uhci0: [GIANT-LOCKED] > +uhci1: [GIANT-LOCKED] > +uhci2: [GIANT-LOCKED] > > Q: Again - is this formatting or are these (and the ones below) still under > Giant in 6.x but not in 5.x? Just formatting. USB (and a lot more) was under GIANT in 5.x as well, but 5.x didn't tell you which drivers were running under GIANT. 6.x does as a gentle reminder that those areas need to be worked on ;) Craig ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Friday 16 December 2005 20:42, Mark Linimon wrote: > And, if someone ever wants to write that 5.X vs 6.X vs 7.X feature list > comparison, now would be a good time :-) Well, here's a nice start (and a question or two slipped in) - dmesg diff between two GENERIC kernels 5 vs 6 stable of the same date, same hardware. Noise reduced (mem range flips on hw, 'same' entries): -FreeBSD 5.4-STABLE #3: Sun Nov 20 03:52:04 CET 2005 -[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC +FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE #1: Wed Dec 7 01:36:46 CET 2005 +[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/current/src/sys/GENERIC Features=0xa7e9f9bf + Features2=0x180 Q: What are those extra features and are they useful? ;-) +npx0: [FAST] -cpu0: on acpi0 +cpu0: on acpi0 Q: Guessing that's a formatting difference, rather then 6.x not recognizing the states (sysctl hw.acpi.cpu.cx_supported confirms 4 states) -ACPI link \\_SB_.PCI0.LNKB has invalid initial irq 11, ignoring +pci_link1: BIOS IRQ 11 for 0.31.INTB is invalid Q: Could this be midi? +uhci0: [GIANT-LOCKED] +uhci1: [GIANT-LOCKED] +uhci2: [GIANT-LOCKED] Q: Again - is this formatting or are these (and the ones below) still under Giant in 6.x but not in 5.x? -pci0: at device 29.7 (no driver attached) +ehci0: mem 0xf4fffc00-0xf4ff irq 11 at device 29.7 on pci0 +ehci0: [GIANT-LOCKED] +usb3: EHCI version 1.0 +usb3: companion controllers, 2 ports each: usb0 usb1 usb2 +usb3: on ehci0 +usb3: USB revision 2.0 +uhub3: Intel EHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 2.00/1.00, addr 1 +uhub3: 6 ports with 6 removable, self powered Kudos! -atapci0: port 0xbfa0-0xbfaf,0x376,0x170-0x177,0x3f6,0x1f0-0x1f7 at device 31.1 on pci0 -ata0: channel #0 on atapci0 -ata1: channel #1 on atapci0 -pcm0: port 0xbc40-0xbc7f,0xb800-0xb8ff mem 0xf4fff400-0xf4fff4ff,0xf4fff800-0xf4fff9ff irq 5 at device 31.5 on pci0 -pcm0: +atapci0: port 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6,0x170-0x177,0x376,0xbfa0-0xbfaf at device 31.1 on pci0 +ata0: on atapci0 +ata1: on atapci0 +pci0: at device 31.5 (no driver attached) Didn't have snd_ich_load="YES" in loader.conf yet. pcm0 appears the same and is GIANT-LOCKED on 6. +atkbd0: [GIANT-LOCKED] +psm0: [GIANT-LOCKED] -Timecounter "TSC" frequency 1398819442 Hz quality 800 -Timecounters tick every 10.000 msec +Timecounter "TSC" frequency 1398819606 Hz quality 800 +Timecounters tick every 1.000 msec Q: This is a big scarey difference :p This isn't a printf bug I presume? -acd0: CDRW at ata1-master PIO4 +acd0: CDRW at ata1-master UDMA33 That's *very* nice! -- Melvyn Sopacua [EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE Qt: 3.3.5 KDE: 3.4.3 ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: indefinite wait buffer: Does this indicate hardware issue?
Hi, Kris, On 12/17/05, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > In that configuration, probably a hardware issue. Is it always the > same block? No, it's sometimes other, and is quite infrequent. On the other hand, neither SMART nor error has reported some incident, so I was stuck when looking on hardware issues, as the message does not indicate which disk(s) may have problem... Cheers, -- Xin LI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.delphij.net ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 10:41:49AM -0800, Gary Kline wrote: > I didn't move until 5 until 5.2+; it was a major move. > There were lots of things to get-right. So maybe by > 6.5, 6 will be granite stable. (Disclaimer: I am not on re@ but I do watch the bugs come in as one of the bugmasters). We completely redid the way we did release engineering between the 5.X series and 6.X series to avoid ever inflicting that much pain again. The jump from 5.2 to 5.3 was huge and we learned many things not to do. The jump from 5.3 to 5.4 was pretty minor -- but so is the jump from 5.4 to 6.0. The emphasis was on a smaller feature set and a much longer (painfully long :-) ) period of QA. The result in the PR database is that for 6.0 vs 5.4, although there are a number of regressions (in particular, certain i386 hardware), the number of entries is far, far, less than for the 5.2.1 to 5.3 transition. So I would urge people to change their view of 6.0. From what I can tell it's one of our strongest releases. It certainly must be the strongest .0 release. In any case, I don't believe there are going to be .5 and .6 releases going forwards. This will keep us, in the future, from spending so much time on MFCs. Some of this background is further detailed in an article I wrote: http://www.FreeBSD.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/version-guide/past-schedules.html I hope that people will find the information there useful. And, if someone ever wants to write that 5.X vs 6.X vs 7.X feature list comparison, now would be a good time :-) mcl ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: indefinite wait buffer: Does this indicate hardware issue?
On Sat, Dec 17, 2005 at 12:49:48AM +0800, Xin LI wrote: > Dear folks, > > I have a box indicating the following sometimes: > "swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 262169, size: 4096" > > It's running FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE, with two Maxtor 7Y250P0 hard disks > attached to Intel ICH5 UDMA100 controller with hw.ata.wc disabled. > > Does this indicate a hardware issue, or some bugs elsewhere? In that configuration, probably a hardware issue. Is it always the same block? This message triggers as a false positive in other cases when swapping is too slow, like if you swap to a swapfile on a heavily loaded filesystem. Kris pgpOmvv3SXeas.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Diskless /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Cannot execute objects on /
On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Paulo Fragoso wrote:
After upgrade from FreeBSD 5.3 to FREEBSD_5_4 (cvs), our diskless
machines didn't work correctly, many applications using dynamic
libraries didn't start, this error was showed:
/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Cannot execute objects on /
We found on all diskless machines had MNT_NOEXEC flags set on (fstatfs).
After that we have changed rtld.c changed:
--- rtld.c.orig Thu Dec 15 17:26:41 2005
+++ rtld.c Thu Dec 15 17:38:15 2005
@@ -1267,7 +1267,7 @@
close(fd);
return NULL;
}
- if (fs.f_flags & MNT_NOEXEC) {
+ if (fs.f_flags & MNT_NOEXEC && strcmp(fs.f_mntonname,"/") ) {
_rtld_error("Cannot execute objects on %s\n",
fs.f_mntonname);
close(fd);
return NULL;
Now, all diskless stations works fine.
Is there another solution for this case?
We had the same problem with our netboot cluster, and going from
RELENG_5_4 (5.4-RELEASE) up to RELENG_5 (5-STABLE) fixed it.
Mike Andrews * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.bit0.com
It's not news, it's Fark.com. Carpe cavy!
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Friday 16 December 2005 10:41 am, Gary Kline wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 06:31:17AM -0500, Scott Robbins wrote: > > > After upgrading to 6-stable, I got regular hang-ups of > > > the system (endless loop?) when swapspace is used > > > extensively. Never happened with 5. > > I didn't move until 5 until 5.2+; it was a major move. > There were lots of things to get-right. So maybe by > 6.5, 6 will be granite stable. I feel compelled to point out that 5 wasn't called -stable until 5.3. 5.0-5.2 were early adopter releases. So 6.n isn't comparable to 5.n (as always YMMV). My understanding is that the whole point of this expedited release process is to avoid the feature creep that leads to huge and sometimes painful leaps (like 4 to 5 was). -David -- "What's the good of having mastery over cosmic balance and knowing the secrets of fate if you can't blow something up?" -Terry Pratchett ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
Gary Kline wrote: On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 02:59:09PM +, Joao Barros wrote: On 12/16/05, Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: FreeBSD 7 We will start preparing for FreeBSD 7.0 in June 2007. I'll hopefully update the release engineering pages soon to reflect this. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me and the rest of the release engineering team. Thanks!ott There have been some questions on the lists about what to expect from release x.y and I personnally have always looked at the TODO list like http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/todo.html For 6.0 I noticed there were more updates on that page for bugs and their fixes than for features per se. My sugestion, maybe at a first stage setting the TODO list has it's advantages, one knows what to expect from a release, it's clearly stated and documented there and the developers can see their goals. This is valid for minor and major releases of course. How about it? Are you volunteering to post the TODO lists here on -stable every N months? I think it's a great idea to have some clues about where we're going, or hope to be going. gary The release TODO list is maintained on the FreeBSD.org website, though it's usually only active during release cycles. I used to also email it out in text format to the mailing lists on a weekly basis. Scott ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 02:59:09PM +, Joao Barros wrote: > On 12/16/05, Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > FreeBSD 7 > > We will start preparing for FreeBSD 7.0 in June 2007. > > > > I'll hopefully update the release engineering pages soon to reflect > > this. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me and the > > rest of the release engineering team. Thanks!ott > > There have been some questions on the lists about what to expect from > release x.y and I personnally have always looked at the TODO list like > http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/todo.html > For 6.0 I noticed there were more updates on that page for bugs and > their fixes than for features per se. My sugestion, maybe at a first > stage setting the TODO list has it's advantages, one knows what to > expect from a release, it's clearly stated and documented there and > the developers can see their goals. > This is valid for minor and major releases of course. > > How about it? > Are you volunteering to post the TODO lists here on -stable every N months? I think it's a great idea to have some clues about where we're going, or hope to be going. gary > -- Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public service Unix ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 06:31:17AM -0500, Scott Robbins wrote: > > A "me too" here for 5-Stable. > > > > I have a test PC, that was running 5-Stable using an > > additional swapfile to extend swap space. Never any > > problems at all with 5. > > > > After upgrading to 6-stable, I got regular hang-ups of > > the system (endless loop?) when swapspace is used > > extensively. Never happened with 5. I didn't move until 5 until 5.2+; it was a major move. There were lots of things to get-right. So maybe by 6.5, 6 will be granite stable. I've been using FBSD since 2.0.5, and while lots of solid features have been thoughtfully added, I just don't see that 6 buys that much more than 5.x. Maybe 7.x, tho... gary > > I have to add my vote for 6, as did someone else in an earlier post. > Like some others, I always found 5.x a bit slower than 4.x (No > benchmarks, completely subjective.) From the very beginning, I've found > 6.x to be stable and quickly moved some non-critical servers to it. > > After testing, we moved the more critical servers to it as well, and > have been quite happy withe results. > > Again, completely subjective, but from the beginning 6.x seemed faster > and more responsive than 5.x > Hmm. A series of benchmarks might prove some points. Back in Aug, 2001 I ran stress tests and other benchmarks to test *this* hardware. I pushed things to a loadave of > 70. Everything held. Maybe we should consider something like this. A series of hard stress tests as well as objective benchmarks as we go forward. It would give one some metrics... . gary -- Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public service Unix ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: indefinite wait buffer: Does this indicate hardware issue?
Hi, Scott, On 12/17/05, Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > It means that either the hardware or driver lost a transaction, or that > some sort LOR-type situation happened in the VM that is preventing the > transaction from completing. First of all, do you have more than 4GB of > RAM? No, actually it has only 1GB of memory... BTW. Wouldn't a LOR cause deadlock if it is preventing the transaction from completing? Cheers, -- Xin LI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.delphij.net ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: indefinite wait buffer: Does this indicate hardware issue?
Hi, On 12/17/05, Stanislaw Halik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Xin LI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have a box indicating the following sometimes: > > "swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 262169, size: 4096" > > Does this indicate a hardware issue, or some bugs elsewhere? > > are you using swapfiles? swap memory through files's performance is kind > of lower than in swap partitions and it might be the cause. i've got > same messages from a server with swap file, but nothing which would > affect stability. No. I used two swap partitions that is on two disks... Cheers, -- Xin LI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.delphij.net ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
gmirror SCSI+IDE
For some funny reasons, I'll probably have to setup a gmirror between a SCSI disk device and a IDE one, and won't have much time for testing. So I'm wondering did anyone do such a thing and are there any caveats. For example, AFAIK SCSI devices are under Giant and IDE are not - is there any reason this would make problems? -- Preserve wildlife -- pickle a squirrel today! ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: indefinite wait buffer: Does this indicate hardware issue?
Xin LI wrote: Dear folks, I have a box indicating the following sometimes: "swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 262169, size: 4096" It's running FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE, with two Maxtor 7Y250P0 hard disks attached to Intel ICH5 UDMA100 controller with hw.ata.wc disabled. Does this indicate a hardware issue, or some bugs elsewhere? Cheers, -- It means that either the hardware or driver lost a transaction, or that some sort LOR-type situation happened in the VM that is preventing the transaction from completing. First of all, do you have more than 4GB of RAM? Scott ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Fri, December 16, 2005 11:45 am, Frank Mayhar said: > Well, there is _one_ reason. I, too, have (almost) all of my machines > up to 6-stable, with the very notable exception of the one that runs > asterisk. Unfortunately, last I looked, the zaptel drivers hadn't been > ported to 6. I found this out the hard way when I upgraded and my VOIP > setup failed spectacularly. I then downgraded back to 5.4 and have been > there ever since, siiigh. -- The zaptel drivers are working fine on 6, check the archives of the asterisk-bsd list: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-bsd/2005-December/001363.html The latest asterisk from CVS HEAD compiles and runs very well on FreeBSD 6-STABLE -give it a try. -kim -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: indefinite wait buffer: Does this indicate hardware issue?
Xin LI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have a box indicating the following sometimes: > "swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 262169, size: 4096" > It's running FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE, with two Maxtor 7Y250P0 hard disks > attached to Intel ICH5 UDMA100 controller with hw.ata.wc disabled. > Does this indicate a hardware issue, or some bugs elsewhere? are you using swapfiles? swap memory through files's performance is kind of lower than in swap partitions and it might be the cause. i've got same messages from a server with swap file, but nothing which would affect stability. -- Stanisław Halik, http://tehran.lain.pl pgpFcOPhEX3BH.pgp Description: PGP signature
indefinite wait buffer: Does this indicate hardware issue?
Dear folks, I have a box indicating the following sometimes: "swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 262169, size: 4096" It's running FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE, with two Maxtor 7Y250P0 hard disks attached to Intel ICH5 UDMA100 controller with hw.ata.wc disabled. Does this indicate a hardware issue, or some bugs elsewhere? Cheers, -- Xin LI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.delphij.net ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 09:57 +0100, Oliver Fromme wrote: > I've seen reports of a few people who had problems with > 6.0, but personally I didn't have any, and I wouldn't > want to go back. In fact I can't think of a single > reason why I wouldn't upgrade a FreeBSD machine to 6.x. Well, there is _one_ reason. I, too, have (almost) all of my machines up to 6-stable, with the very notable exception of the one that runs asterisk. Unfortunately, last I looked, the zaptel drivers hadn't been ported to 6. I found this out the hard way when I upgraded and my VOIP setup failed spectacularly. I then downgraded back to 5.4 and have been there ever since, siiigh. -- Frank Mayhar [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.exit.com/ Exit Consulting http://www.gpsclock.com/ http://www.exit.com/blog/frank/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: My ungodly PF config - am I sane and brilliant, or just deluded and dangerous?
On Dec 16, 2005, at 1:13 AM, J. Buck Caldwell wrote: Here's the fun part. Our traffic has gotten to the point where I've decided that some traffic shaping (ALTQ) is necessary. I've been experimenting with my home cable internet connection (and gif tunnel to work), and I believe I've come up with a workable solution. However, I'd like to run it by some experts to see if I'm screwing up (or hitting any possible limits) before I try putting it in place live. You may wish to take a look at an embedded GUI based firewall system like pfSense to help you configure this. It has a traffic shaping wizard and can do IPsec VPNs as well. It is based on FreeBSD 6.0 so will run on whatever hardware you've got already. See http://www.pfsense.com/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: NFS UDP mounts on RELENG_6?
Oliver Brandmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm experiencing problems when trying to mount NFS filesystems from a > RELENG_6 server (FreeBSD hudson 6.0-STABLE FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE >#0: Wed Dec 14 16:59:55 CET 2005 >[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/NFS-32-FBSD6 i386) > to either 5.4-STABLE or 6-STABLE clients. mounting works fine, but > afterwards the access to the filesystem on the client stalls. As soon > as I mount the FS with a TCP mount everything works as expected. > > The mounts worked fine on UDP when the server was 5.4-STABLE. There > is just a plain GigE switch involved, no firewalls or routing. > > Anyone else experiencing those problems or having an idea? I just copied some files (<200 MB) from a NFS Server running FreeBSD africanqueen.local 6.0-STABLE FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE #5: Thu Dec 15 19:31:12 CET 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/AFRICANQUEEN i386 without problems. My client runs FreeBSD 5.4, I use GigE as well, but no switch. Fabian -- http://www.fabiankeil.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On 12/16/05, Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > FreeBSD 7 > We will start preparing for FreeBSD 7.0 in June 2007. > > I'll hopefully update the release engineering pages soon to reflect > this. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me and the > rest of the release engineering team. Thanks!ott There have been some questions on the lists about what to expect from release x.y and I personnally have always looked at the TODO list like http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/todo.html For 6.0 I noticed there were more updates on that page for bugs and their fixes than for features per se. My sugestion, maybe at a first stage setting the TODO list has it's advantages, one knows what to expect from a release, it's clearly stated and documented there and the developers can see their goals. This is valid for minor and major releases of course. How about it? -- Joao Barros ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
NFS UDP mounts on RELENG_6?
Hi, I'm experiencing problems when trying to mount NFS filesystems from a RELENG_6 server (FreeBSD hudson 6.0-STABLE FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE #0: Wed Dec 14 16:59:55 CET 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/NFS-32-FBSD6 i386) to either 5.4-STABLE or 6-STABLE clients. mounting works fine, but afterwards the access to the filesystem on the client stalls. As soon as I mount the FS with a TCP mount everything works as expected. The mounts worked fine on UDP when the server was 5.4-STABLE. There is just a plain GigE switch involved, no firewalls or routing. Anyone else experiencing those problems or having an idea? - Oliver -- | Oliver Brandmueller | Offenbacher Str. 1 | Germany D-14197 Berlin | | Fon +49-172-3130856 | Fax +49-172-3145027 | WWW: http://the.addict.de/ | | Ich bin das Internet. Sowahr ich Gott helfe. | | Eine gewerbliche Nutzung aller enthaltenen Adressen ist nicht gestattet! | ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Diskless /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Cannot execute objects on /
Paulo Fragoso wrote: Hi, After upgrade from FreeBSD 5.3 to FREEBSD_5_4 (cvs), our diskless machines didn't work correctly, many applications using dynamic libraries didn't start, this error was showed: /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Cannot execute objects on / We found on all diskless machines had MNT_NOEXEC flags set on (fstatfs). After that we have changed rtld.c changed: Ops, all remote mount points defined with read-only on server has MNT_NOEXEC flag seted on the clients (diskless), is there a bug with fstatfs function? server: /usr/X11R6 -ro -network A.B.C.D -mask 255.255.255.0 client: A.B.C.S:/usr/X11R6 /usr/X11R6 nfs ro,tcp,nfsv3,-w=32768,-r=32768 0 0 On the cliente NFS the /usr/X11R6 has MNT_NOEXEC seted! Paulo Fragoso. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 02:50:05AM -0800, Rob wrote: > Gary Kline wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 12:04:05AM -0700, Scott Long > wrote: > > > >>All, > >> > >>The following is the approximate schedule for > FreeBSD releases in 2006: > >> > > Sounds like an ambitious schedule... All my FBSD > servers > > are at least up to 5.3; my laptop is happy at 5.4. > I have > > what I believe to be a rationalquestion. > > A "me too" here for 5-Stable. > > I have a test PC, that was running 5-Stable using an > additional swapfile to extend swap space. Never any > problems at all with 5. > > After upgrading to 6-stable, I got regular hang-ups of > the system (endless loop?) when swapspace is used > extensively. Never happened with 5. I have to add my vote for 6, as did someone else in an earlier post. Like some others, I always found 5.x a bit slower than 4.x (No benchmarks, completely subjective.) From the very beginning, I've found 6.x to be stable and quickly moved some non-critical servers to it. After testing, we moved the more critical servers to it as well, and have been quite happy withe results. Again, completely subjective, but from the beginning 6.x seemed faster and more responsive than 5.x - -- Scott Robbins PGP keyID EB3467D6 ( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 ) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6 Buffy: Have I ever let you down? Giles: Do you want me to answer that, or shall I just glare? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFDoqWF+lTVdes0Z9YRAoKhAKCKDOxqSbwz9qwf9HowpmyOP249PwCfbjY0 LjZzXXCn/Jy76/8JA+p+0A4= =yVGK -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Problems with ata RAID?
- Original Message - From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Would that also explain the errors on ad6 though? Seems quite strange to be getting errors on 3 out of the 4 disks in the 0+1 array. I'd say ad4 went kaboom and is corrupting traffic on its bus, thus the ad5 CRC warnings. (Remember that Parallel ATA drives are master/slave.) ad4: timeout waiting to issue command ad4: error issueing WRITE_DMA command ar0: WARNING - mirror protection lost. RAID0+1 array in DEGRADED mode ad4: timeout waiting to issue command ad4: error issueing WRITE_DMA command ad4: write metadata failed ad6: req=0xc49b0578 WRITE_DMA semaphore timeout !! DANGER Will Robinson !! ad5: WARNING - WRITE_DMA UDMA ICRC error (retrying request) LBA=2325663 Steve This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone (023) 8024 3137 or return the E.mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Diskless /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Cannot execute objects on /
Hi,
After upgrade from FreeBSD 5.3 to FREEBSD_5_4 (cvs), our diskless
machines didn't work correctly, many applications using dynamic
libraries didn't start, this error was showed:
/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Cannot execute objects on /
We found on all diskless machines had MNT_NOEXEC flags set on (fstatfs).
After that we have changed rtld.c changed:
--- rtld.c.orig Thu Dec 15 17:26:41 2005
+++ rtld.c Thu Dec 15 17:38:15 2005
@@ -1267,7 +1267,7 @@
close(fd);
return NULL;
}
- if (fs.f_flags & MNT_NOEXEC) {
+ if (fs.f_flags & MNT_NOEXEC && strcmp(fs.f_mntonname,"/") ) {
_rtld_error("Cannot execute objects on %s\n",
fs.f_mntonname);
close(fd);
return NULL;
Now, all diskless stations works fine.
Is there another solution for this case?
Thanks,
Paulo Fragoso.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
Gary Kline wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 12:04:05AM -0700, Scott Long wrote: > >>All, >> >>The following is the approximate schedule for FreeBSD releases in 2006: >> >>Jan 30: Freeze RELENG_5 and RELENG_6 >>Mar 20: Release FreeBSD 6.1 >>Apr 3: Release FreeBSD 5.5 >>Jun 12: Freeze RELENG_6 >>Jul 31: Release FreeBSD 6.2 >>Oct 23: Freeze RELENG_6 >>Dec 11: Release FreeBSD 6.3 >> >>A 'freeze' means that the tree will be closed to changes except with >>specific approval, and the focus will be on producing, testing, and >>fixing release candidates. The release dates are targets that we hope >>to make, but we will continue with the policy of only releasing once >>all of the showstoppers are cleared, i.e. we will release when it is >>ready. >> >>FreeBSD 5 >>5.5 will be the final release from the RELENG_5 tree. We are doing it >>to provide support for users who have committed to FreeBSD 5 and who >>need more time to transition to FreeBSD 6. However, in order to keep >>forward progress with FreeBSD 6, we will produce this in parallel with >>the 6.1 release, and thus it will not be our main focus. Users who are >>using FreeBSD 5 are strongly encouraged to evaluate FreeBSD 6. After >>this final release, the security team will provide security update >>support through 2007. > > > Sounds like an ambitious schedule... All my FBSD servers > are at least up to 5.3; my laptop is happy at 5.4. I have > what I believe to be a rationalquestion. Why should I go > beyond v5.5? More to the point, why can't minor security > tweaks be maintained indefinitely for 5.5? What will > releases -6 and -7 offer that can;t reasonably be dropped > into -5? A "me too" here for 5-Stable. I have a test PC, that was running 5-Stable using an additional swapfile to extend swap space. Never any problems at all with 5. After upgrading to 6-stable, I got regular hang-ups of the system (endless loop?) when swapspace is used extensively. Never happened with 5. I wild guess of mine is that there's problem with the 'enhanced filesystem access' in 6. I've reported this issue, and also provided backtraces of kernel dumps, although I'm not an expert in kernel debugging. However, no reponse so far. For me 6, as of now, is not yet as stable as 5 used to be. Regards, Rob. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
Gary Kline wrote: Sounds like an ambitious schedule... All my FBSD servers are at least up to 5.3; my laptop is happy at 5.4. I have what I believe to be a rationalquestion. Why should I go beyond v5.5? There is one school of thought that says you shouldn't. If it works for you, there is no real need to upgrade. More to the point, why can't minor security tweaks be maintained indefinitely for 5.5? We don't support any branch of FreeBSD indefinitely. What will releases -6 and -7 offer that can;t reasonably be dropped into -5? New features that require protocol/ABI changes, etc. for one. For example, I'm working on adding ports/local rc.d scripts to the overall rcorder, and that change won't go back into RELENG_5 because it constitutes a major paradigm shift, and we don't mess with -stable branches in that way. hth, Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
Gary Kline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sounds like an ambitious schedule... All my FBSD servers > are at least up to 5.3; my laptop is happy at 5.4. I have > what I believe to be a rationalquestion. Why should I go > beyond v5.5? Because 6 better, faster, more colorful and more fun. :-) But seriously ... I'm running all my machines at home on RELENG_6 (6-stable by now) for half a year already, especially including my notebook. A lot of things that didn't work with 5.x or required a lot of fiddling now "just run" out of the box with FreeBSD 6, and it also feels a bit faster. Also, power-saving works better, so my notebook runs longer on battery. Stability is the same or even better -- I haven't had a single panic in those six months for which I've been using RELENG_6 (except a few panics upon shutdown, but after syncing the disks so it didn't hurt anything; I guess it's an ACPI issue with that particular mainboard, because it happens only on one of the machines). The upgrade from 5.x to 6.x is completely painless and no more risky or difficult than from 5.3 to 5.4. I've seen reports of a few people who had problems with 6.0, but personally I didn't have any, and I wouldn't want to go back. In fact I can't think of a single reason why I wouldn't upgrade a FreeBSD machine to 6.x. YMMV. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. "Perl will consistently give you what you want, unless what you want is consistency." -- Larry Wall ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: mountd fails intermittently
Oliver Fromme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Michael Sperber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Oliver Fromme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > That looks like your rpcbind(8) process died. Can you > > > check that with ps? Also, are there any warnings or > > > errors reported in /var/log/messages? > > > > No, it's still running. It shows up in rpcinfo (as does nfsd), > > But mountd does not show up there? It shows up, too. It just doesn't respond to pings. > Now the one question is: What are the circumstances under > which the problem can be reproduced? :-) Of course I'm > aware that that's probably a tough question. It's pretty reproducible: A mount attempt from my one problematic client will do it. > 1. First of all, it might be helpful to see the contents > of your /etc/exports. To be honest, I don't think that > it is causing the problem, but you never know. /storage/disk1 192.168.1.100 > 2. Does your mountd log anything to /var/log/messages? > No. > 3. What flags are you using with rpcbind and mountd, rpcbind: no flags mountd: -r (but problem shows up without it, too) > if > any? What flags are you using with the mount command > line (i.e. anything unusual)? No flags: mount_nfs matt://storag/disk1 > 4. Please post the output from these commands (preferably > before failure and after failure, if possible): > # rpcinfo > # sockstat | egrep "mountd|rpc" Hrm. I see that just running these commands (on the server) pretty reliably puts it into failure mode. So here's the output from one run: program version netid addressserviceowner 104tcp 0.0.0.0.0.111 rpcbindsuperuser 103tcp 0.0.0.0.0.111 rpcbindsuperuser 102tcp 0.0.0.0.0.111 rpcbindsuperuser 104udp 0.0.0.0.0.111 rpcbindsuperuser 103udp 0.0.0.0.0.111 rpcbindsuperuser 102udp 0.0.0.0.0.111 rpcbindsuperuser 104tcp6 ::.0.111 rpcbindsuperuser 103tcp6 ::.0.111 rpcbindsuperuser 104udp6 ::.0.111 rpcbindsuperuser 103udp6 ::.0.111 rpcbindsuperuser 104local /var/run/rpcbind.sock rpcbindsuperuser 103local /var/run/rpcbind.sock rpcbindsuperuser 102local /var/run/rpcbind.sock rpcbindsuperuser 132udp 0.0.0.0.8.1nfssuperuser 133udp 0.0.0.0.8.1nfssuperuser 132udp6 ::.8.1 nfssuperuser 133udp6 ::.8.1 nfssuperuser 132tcp 0.0.0.0.8.1nfssuperuser 133tcp 0.0.0.0.8.1nfssuperuser 132tcp6 ::.8.1 nfssuperuser 133tcp6 ::.8.1 nfssuperuser 151udp 0.0.0.0.3.247 mountd superuser 153udp 0.0.0.0.3.247 mountd superuser 151tcp 0.0.0.0.2.99 mountd superuser 153tcp 0.0.0.0.2.99 mountd superuser 151udp6 ::.3.246 mountd superuser 153udp6 ::.3.246 mountd superuser 151tcp6 ::.2.98mountd superuser 153tcp6 ::.2.98mountd superuser root mountd 72379 4 udp4 *:1015*:* root mountd 72379 7 tcp4 *:611 *:* root mountd 72379 8 udp6 *:1014*:* root mountd 72379 9 tcp6 *:610 *:* root rpcbind54162 4 udp6 *:* *:* root rpcbind54162 7 stream /var/run/rpcbind.sock root rpcbind54162 8 udp6 *:111 *:* root rpcbind54162 9 udp6 *:642 *:* root rpcbind54162 10 tcp6 *:111 *:* root rpcbind54162 11 udp4 *:111 *:* root rpcbind54162 12 udp4 *:673 *:* root rpcbind54162 13 tcp4 *:111 *:* > 5. If all else fails, maybe tracing the mountd process > during a failing mount attempt might be helpful. > Personally I prefer strace (from the ports collection) > for the more useful output, but you can also use ktrace > which is in the base system. I'll try that sometime over the weekend. -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.free
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
Gary Kline wrote: On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 12:04:05AM -0700, Scott Long wrote: All, The following is the approximate schedule for FreeBSD releases in 2006: Jan 30: Freeze RELENG_5 and RELENG_6 Mar 20: Release FreeBSD 6.1 Apr 3: Release FreeBSD 5.5 Jun 12: Freeze RELENG_6 Jul 31: Release FreeBSD 6.2 Oct 23: Freeze RELENG_6 Dec 11: Release FreeBSD 6.3 A 'freeze' means that the tree will be closed to changes except with specific approval, and the focus will be on producing, testing, and fixing release candidates. The release dates are targets that we hope to make, but we will continue with the policy of only releasing once all of the showstoppers are cleared, i.e. we will release when it is ready. FreeBSD 5 5.5 will be the final release from the RELENG_5 tree. We are doing it to provide support for users who have committed to FreeBSD 5 and who need more time to transition to FreeBSD 6. However, in order to keep forward progress with FreeBSD 6, we will produce this in parallel with the 6.1 release, and thus it will not be our main focus. Users who are using FreeBSD 5 are strongly encouraged to evaluate FreeBSD 6. After this final release, the security team will provide security update support through 2007. Sounds like an ambitious schedule... All my FBSD servers are at least up to 5.3; my laptop is happy at 5.4. I have what I believe to be a rationalquestion. Why should I go beyond v5.5? More to the point, why can't minor security tweaks be maintained indefinitely for 5.5? Security updates will be maintained for quite a while. However, it takes manpower to test each proposed security change, so it's very hard to justify doing them 'indefinitely'. The stated policy from the security team is 2 years. So they will probably support 5.5 into 2008, but I wanted to be conservative in my statement in case they have different plans. What will releases -6 and -7 offer that can;t reasonably be dropped into -5? Significant performance and stability enhancements that simply cannot be broken up and backported to FreeBSD 5. We are marching towards a 'Giant-less' kernel, which means continuing better SMP performance and better UP responsiveness. With 6.0 we are finally starting to see the benefit of the SMPng work that we've been doing for 5 years. Scott ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 12:04:05AM -0700, Scott Long wrote: > All, > > The following is the approximate schedule for FreeBSD releases in 2006: > > Jan 30: Freeze RELENG_5 and RELENG_6 > Mar 20: Release FreeBSD 6.1 > Apr 3: Release FreeBSD 5.5 > Jun 12: Freeze RELENG_6 > Jul 31: Release FreeBSD 6.2 > Oct 23: Freeze RELENG_6 > Dec 11: Release FreeBSD 6.3 > > A 'freeze' means that the tree will be closed to changes except with > specific approval, and the focus will be on producing, testing, and > fixing release candidates. The release dates are targets that we hope > to make, but we will continue with the policy of only releasing once > all of the showstoppers are cleared, i.e. we will release when it is > ready. > > FreeBSD 5 > 5.5 will be the final release from the RELENG_5 tree. We are doing it > to provide support for users who have committed to FreeBSD 5 and who > need more time to transition to FreeBSD 6. However, in order to keep > forward progress with FreeBSD 6, we will produce this in parallel with > the 6.1 release, and thus it will not be our main focus. Users who are > using FreeBSD 5 are strongly encouraged to evaluate FreeBSD 6. After > this final release, the security team will provide security update > support through 2007. Sounds like an ambitious schedule... All my FBSD servers are at least up to 5.3; my laptop is happy at 5.4. I have what I believe to be a rationalquestion. Why should I go beyond v5.5? More to the point, why can't minor security tweaks be maintained indefinitely for 5.5? What will releases -6 and -7 offer that can;t reasonably be dropped into -5? gary -- Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public service Unix ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
