Re: buildworld fail in stable/11 @r325033 -- r325029?

[Dan Mack]

FWIW - I had a successful build yesterday on stable/11 r325010; I have
not tried anything newer yet.

Dan

David Wolfskill  writes:

> This is observed on systems (both my laptop & my build machine) running
> stable/11 @r325003, after updating sources to r325033:
>
> --- libprocstat.o ---
> In file included from /usr/src/lib/libprocstat/libprocstat.c:69:
> /usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/include/sys/ptrace.h:148:19: error: field has 
> incomplete type 'struct siginfo32'
> struct siginfo32 pl_siginfo;/* siginfo for signal */
>  ^
> /usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/include/sys/ptrace.h:148:9: note: forward 
> declaration of 'struct siginfo32'
> struct siginfo32 pl_siginfo;/* siginfo for signal */
>^
>
> I don't know that r325029 is to blame, but that was the last commit
> in that area (in the range r325003 -  r325033).  And there wwer not
> very many commits to stable/11 in that range:
>
> 1. Oct 27 Konstantin Belousov svn commit: r325033 - stable/11/sys/vm
> 2. Oct 27 Bryan Drewery   svn commit: r325029 - in stable/11: 
> sys/compat/freeb
> 3. Oct 26 Ian Lepore  svn commit: r325023 - stable/11/sys/dev/sdhci
> 4. Oct 26 Tijl Coosemans  svn commit: r325015 - in stable/11/sys: 
> compat/linsy
> 5. Oct 25 Alan Somers svn commit: r325003 - in stable/11: sys/geom 
> sys/sys
>
> Peace,
> david
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: my build time impact of clang 5.0

[Dan Mack]

Andy Farkas  writes:

> Perhaps you could hack src/tools/tools/whereintheworld/whereintheworld.pl
>
> -andyf

So, I creatd a slightly different build script in perl; kinda works but
needs to be optimized:

 https://github.com/danmack/freebsd-buildtools

Basic output looks like with timing on each "section":

Building FreeBSD (svn: 324242)
Build Time :  20171003.174621
SRC URL:  https://svn.freebsd.org/base/stable/11
KERNEL CONF:  GENERIC
BUILD UUID :  
20171003.174621|https://svn.freebsd.org/base/stable/11|GENERIC|/usr/src
SRC DIR:  /usr/src
LOG DIR:  /var/log/bsdbuild/324242

 ... building phase buildworld ...
   >>> World build started   ... 00:00:02 : 00:00:04
   >>> Rebuilding the temporary build tree   ... 00:00:00 : 00:00:06
   >>> stage 1.1: legacy release compatibility s ... 00:00:00 : 00:00:08
   >>> stage 1.2: bootstrap tools... 00:00:00 : 00:00:10
   >>> stage 2.1: cleaning up the object tree... 00:03:43 : 00:03:55
   >>> stage 2.2: rebuilding the object tree ... 00:01:01 : 00:04:58
   >>> stage 2.3: build tools... 00:00:21 : 00:05:21
   >>> stage 3: cross tools  ... 00:00:04 : 00:05:28
   >>> stage 3.1: recording compiler metadata... 00:00:44 : 00:06:14
   >>> stage 4.1: building includes  ... 00:00:00 : 00:06:16
   >>> stage 4.2: building libraries ... 00:00:19 : 00:06:37

Dan
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: my build time impact of clang 5.0

[Dan Mack]

Jakub Lach  writes:

> On the other hand, I'm having tremendous increases in Unixbench scores
> comparing to 
> 11-STABLE in the April (same machine, clang 4 then, clang 5 now) (about
> 40%).
>
> I have never seen something like that, and I'm running Unixbench on -STABLE
> since
> 2008.

Agree; clang/llvm and friends have added a lot of value.  It's worth it
I think.

It is however getting harder to continue with a source based update
model, which I prefer even though most people just use package managers
today.

I still like to read the commits and understand what's changing, why,
and select the version I am comfortable with given the nuances of my
configuration(s).  I think that's why 'knock-on-wood' I've been able to
track mostly CURRENT and/or STABLE without any outages since about 1998
on production systems :-)

___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: my build time impact of clang 5.0

[Dan Mack]

Mike Tancsa <m...@sentex.net> writes:

> On 10/2/2017 2:34 PM, Dan Mack wrote:
>>
>> Another significant change in build times this week - not complaining,
>> just my observations on build times; same server doing buildworld during
>> the various phases of compiler changes over the last year or so FWIW:
>
> Kernel seems to be about the same since 4.x  Perhaps the added
> buildworld time is due to a larger feature set of clang 5.x  and hence
> takes longer to build itself ?  e.g. more platforms supported etc ?

My scripts are pretty coarse grained so I only have timings at the macro
build steps so far (buildworld, buildkernel, installkernel, and
installworld)  I'm going to update them so I can a little more
granularity; should be easy to get timings wrapped around the big
sections, for example:

 >>> World build started on Mon Oct  2 07:49:56 CDT 2017
 >>> Rebuilding the temporary build tree
 >>> stage 1.1: legacy release compatibility shims
 >>> stage 1.2: bootstrap tools
 >>> stage 2.1: cleaning up the object tree
 >>> stage 2.2: rebuilding the object tree
 >>> stage 2.3: build tools
 >>> stage 3: cross tools
 >>> stage 3.1: recording compiler metadata
 >>> stage 4.1: building includes
 >>> stage 4.2: building libraries
 >>> stage 4.3: building everything
 >>> stage 5.1: building lib32 shim libraries
 >>> World build completed on Mon Oct  2 12:30:02 CDT 2017

Dan

>> -STABLE amd64
>> |--+--+---+--+---|
>> | Ver (svn-id) | World (mins) | Kernel (mins) | Relative | Comment   |
>> |--+--+---+--+---|
>> |   292733 |   90 |16 |  0.5 |   |
>> |   299948 |   89 |16 |  0.5 |   |
>> |   322724 |  174 |21 |  1.0 | clang 4.x |
>> |   323310 |  175 |21 |  1.0 | clang 4.x |
>> |   323984 |  175 |21 |  1.0 | clang 4.x |
>> |   324130 |  285 |21 |  1.6 | clang 5.x |
>> |   324204 |  280 |21 |  1.6 | clang 5.x |
>> |--+--+---+--+---|
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

my build time impact of clang 5.0

[Dan Mack]

Another significant change in build times this week - not complaining,
just my observations on build times; same server doing buildworld during
the various phases of compiler changes over the last year or so FWIW:

|--+--+---+--+---|
| Ver (svn-id) | World (mins) | Kernel (mins) | Relative | Comment   |
|--+--+---+--+---|
|   292733 |   90 |16 |  0.5 |   |
|   299948 |   89 |16 |  0.5 |   |
|   322724 |  174 |21 |  1.0 | clang 4.x |
|   323310 |  175 |21 |  1.0 | clang 4.x |
|   323984 |  175 |21 |  1.0 | clang 4.x |
|   324130 |  285 |21 |  1.6 | clang 5.x |
|   324204 |  280 |21 |  1.6 | clang 5.x |
|--+--+---+--+---|

Dan
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

new 'make installworld' warnings

[Dan Mack]

I buildworld / installworld a few times per week.   I don't think I've 
ever seen these messages before:


make[1]: "/usr/obj/usr/src/compiler-metadata.mk" line 1: Using cached 
compiler metadata from build at cow.example.com on Sun May  7 
09:13:52 CDT 2017
make[3]: "/usr/obj/usr/src/compiler-metadata.mk" line 1: Using cached 
compiler metadata from build at cow.example.com on Sun May  7 
09:13:52 CDT 2017


Possibly due to a significant enough deley between the run of buildworld 
and installworld?  Build and install were otherwise successful.


This happened when transitioning between 317440-stable -> 317906-stable

Dan
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

buildworld build times 10-stable vs. 11-stable

[Dan Mack]

I have a system which builds world, kernel, install, boot, installworld, 
reboot several times per week.   I just noticed that my build times 
increased from about (just cherry picking a couple build logs):


  Starting build of FreeBSD SVN [309852]  10.3-STABLE
  Kernel will be GENERIC
building world ...  90:35 0


  Starting build of FreeBSD SVN [312099]  11.0-STABLE
  Kernel will be GENERIC
building world ...  146:23 0

before I start bisecting the log files, is there something obvious 
introduced in 11 that I missed that would explain the roughly 50 minute 
difference in my build times?   clang?  additional subsystems?


I'm using the same zpool / disks / memory etc.

Dan
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: MFC of ZFSv15

[Dan Mack]

But I should be able to boot my ZFSv14 root pool using the ZFSv15 build of 
FreeBSD, correct?   But the problem scenario would be when I've upgraded my 
root pool to v15 and I attempt to boot it with v14 boot loader.  At least that 
is what I think ...

I guess what I'm getting at is ... you should be able to buildworld, 
installkernel, reboot, installworld, reboot without worry.   But after your run 
'zpool upgrade', you will need to re-write the bootcode using gpart on each of 
your root pool ZFS disks.

Am I understanding this correctly ?

Thanks for all the work on ZFS BTW, it's great!

Dan
On Sep 16, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Martin Matuska wrote:

 Dont forget to read the general ZFS notes section in UPDATING:
 
 ZFS notes
 -
 When upgrading the boot ZFS pool to a new version, always follow
 these two steps:
 
 1.) recompile and reinstall the ZFS boot loader and boot block
 (this is part of make buildworld and make installworld)
 
 2.) update the ZFS boot block on your boot drive
 
 The following example updates the ZFS boot block on the first
 partition (freebsd-boot) of a GPT partitioned drive ad0:
 gpart bootcode -p /boot/gptzfsboot -i 1 ad0
 
 Non-boot pools do not need these updates.
 
 Dňa 16. 9. 2010 17:43, Mike Tancsa wrote / napísal(a):
 At 11:18 AM 9/16/2010, jhell wrote:
 On 09/16/2010 09:55, Mike Tancsa wrote:
 
 Thanks again for all the ZFS fixes and enhancements! Are there any
 caveats to upgrading ?
 
 Do I just do
 
 zpool upgrade -a
 zfs upgrade -a
 
 or are there any extra steps ?
 
 
 Hi Mike,
 
 No-one knows your bootcode better than you. So if you are upgrading
 don't forget if you are on a ZFS root then your bootcode might need
 updating.
 
 
 Hi,
 I am booting off UFS right now so no bootcode updates for me :) I did
 look at UPDATING which does mention
 
 20100915:
 A new version of ZFS (version 15) has been merged.
 This version uses a python library for the following subcommands:
 zfs allow, zfs unallow, zfs groupspace, zfs userspace.
 For full functionality of these commands the following port must
 be installed: sysutils/py-zfs
 
 ---Mike
 
 
 
 Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400
 Sentex Communications, m...@sentex.net
 Providing Internet since 1994 www.sentex.net
 Cambridge, Ontario Canada www.sentex.net/mike
 ___
 freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Dan
--
Dan Mack
m...@macktronics.com




___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: MFC of ZFSv15

[Dan Mack]

But I should be able to boot my ZFSv14 root pool using the ZFSv15 build of 
FreeBSD, correct?   But the problem scenario would be when I've upgraded by 
root pool to v15 and I attempt to boot it with v14 boot loader.  At least that 
is what I think ...

I guess what I'm getting at is ... you should be able to buildworld, 
installkernel, reboot, installworld, reboot without worry.   But when after 
your run 'zpool upgrade', you will need to re-write the bootcode using gpart on 
each of your root pool ZFS disks.

Am I understanding this correctly ?

Thanks for all the work on ZFS BTW, it's great!

Dan

On Sep 16, 2010, at 2:03 PM, Henri Hennebert wrote:

 On 09/16/2010 17:18, jhell wrote:
 On 09/16/2010 09:55, Mike Tancsa wrote:
 
 Thanks again for all the ZFS fixes and enhancements!   Are there any
 caveats to upgrading ?
 
 Do I just do
 
 zpool upgrade -a
 zfs upgrade -a
 
 or are there any extra steps ?
 
 
 Hi Mike,
 
 No-one knows your bootcode better than you. So if you are upgrading
 don't forget if you are on a ZFS root then your bootcode might need
 updating.
 
 I was bitten by this problem in a previous ZFS upgrade.
 
 To be sure, I have added this patch to zfsimpl.c so, at boot I know if 
 zpool/zfs upgrade will be OK.
 
 Henri
 
 Regards, UPDATING should have anything else.
 
 
 sys_boot_zfs.patch___
 freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Dan
--
Dan Mack
m...@macktronics.com




___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: MFC of ZFSv15

[Dan Mack]

Thanks for the confirmation.  This worked fine and I did notice that zpool 
upgrade zroot was nice enough to emit the reminder:

  gpart bootcode -b /boot/pmbr -p /boot/gptzfsboot -i 1 da0

which is slightly different than the recipe given in /usr/src/UPDATING:

gpart bootcode -p /boot/gptzfsboot -i 1 ad0

Since the recipe for my root/zfs system included pmbr and gptzfsboot, I used 
the example emitted from the zpool command instead of the one from UPDATING.


e.g.

  pool: zroot
 state: ONLINE
status: The pool is formatted using an older on-disk format.  The pool can
still be used, but some features are unavailable.
action: Upgrade the pool using 'zpool upgrade'.  Once this is done, the
pool will no longer be accessible on older software versions.
 scrub: none requested
config:

NAME   STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
zroot  ONLINE   0 0 0
  mirror   ONLINE   0 0 0
gpt/disk0  ONLINE   0 0 0
gpt/disk1  ONLINE   0 0 0

errors: No known data errors

(zfs) ~ # zpool upgrade zroot
This system is currently running ZFS pool version 15.

Successfully upgraded 'zroot' from version 14 to version 15

If you boot from pool 'zroot', don't forget to update boot code.
Assuming you use GPT partitioning and da0 is your boot disk
the following command will do it:

gpart bootcode -b /boot/pmbr -p /boot/gptzfsboot -i 1 da0

(zfs) ~/zfs # gpart bootcode -b /boot/pmbr -p /boot/gptzfsboot -i 1 ad4
ad4 has bootcode
(zfs) ~/zfs # gpart bootcode -b /boot/pmbr -p /boot/gptzfsboot -i 1 ad5
ad5 has bootcode
(zfs) ~/zfs # gpart bootcode -b /boot/pmbr -p /boot/gptzfsboot -i 1 ad6
ad6 has bootcode
(zfs) ~/zfs # gpart bootcode -b /boot/pmbr -p /boot/gptzfsboot -i 1 ad7
ad7 has bootcode
(zfs) ~/zfs # gpart bootcode -b /boot/pmbr -p /boot/gptzfsboot -i 1 ad8
ad8 has bootcode

(zfs) ~/zfs # reboot



Dan

On Sep 19, 2010, at 12:41 PM, Matthew Seaman wrote:

 On 19/09/2010 17:36:01, Dan Mack wrote:
 But I should be able to boot my ZFSv14 root pool using the ZFSv15
 build of FreeBSD, correct?   But the problem scenario would be when
 I've upgraded my root pool to v15 and I attempt to boot it with v14
 boot loader.  At least that is what I think ...
 
 Yes.  The bootloader is not prescient, so  bootloader compiled against
 v14 can't cope with a zpool using v15.  It's only the on-disk format
 that counts in this: zfs software will operate perfectly well with older
 on-disk data formats.
 
 I guess what I'm getting at is ... you should be able to buildworld,
 installkernel, reboot, installworld, reboot without worry.   But
 after your run 'zpool upgrade', you will need to re-write the
 bootcode using gpart on each of your root pool ZFS disks.
 
 If you want to be completely paranoid, you could update the bootcode on
 your boot drive (or one out of a mirror pair, if that's what you're
 using) at the point of running installkernel and way before you run
 'zpool upgrade'.  In theory, should this go horribly wrong and you end
 up with an unbootable system, you can recover by booting the 8.0 install
 media into FIXIT mode and reinstalling the bootblocks from there (or
 booting from the other disk in your mirror set).  Once you've got a
 system you know will reboot with the new bootblocks, then go ahead and
 with installworld and updating the zpool version.
 
 Am I understanding this correctly ?
 
 Yep.  That's quite right.  Running 'zpool upgrade -a' is one of those
 operations you can't easily reverse, so designing an upgrade plan where
 you can stop and back-out at any point is quite tricky.  Fortunately,
 the risk of things going wrong at the point of running zpool upgrade is
 really very small, so for most purposes, just ploughing ahead and
 accepting the really very small risk is going to be acceptable.
 
   Cheers,
 
   Matthew
 
 -- 
 Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.   7 Priory Courtyard
  Flat 3
 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
 JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk   Kent, CT11 9PW
 

Dan
--
Dan Mack
m...@macktronics.com




___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

installkernel and nvram.ko on RELENG_6 broken?

[Dan Mack]

I have a custom kernel without nvram defined anywhere, however, make  
installkernel still attempts to install the module.  About 45 days  
ago, I didn't have this issue.  I didn't see anything about this in  
UPDATING so I thought I would check here.  This system is currently  
running stable from 45 days ago built from source.  I cvsuped 4 hours  
ago.


# make installkernel KERNCONF=SMP-COCO

=== nullfs (install)
install -o root -g wheel -m 555   nullfs.ko /boot/kernel
=== nve (install)
install -o root -g wheel -m 555   if_nve.ko /boot/kernel
=== nvram (install)
install -o root -g wheel -m 555   nvram.ko /boot/kernel
install: nvram.ko: No such file or directory
*** Error code 71

Stop in /usr/src/sys/modules/nvram.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/src/sys/modules.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP-COCO.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/src.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/src.


___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: installkernel and nvram.ko on RELENG_6 broken?

[Dan Mack]

I have removed /usr/obj and am going through the whole buildworld/ 
buildkernel/installkernel process again.  There were a bunch of stale  
files under /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/i386/compile that may be the issue.


Dan

On Sep 11, 2008, at 2:55 PM, Dan Mack wrote:

I have a custom kernel without nvram defined anywhere, however, make  
installkernel still attempts to install the module.  About 45 days  
ago, I didn't have this issue.  I didn't see anything about this in  
UPDATING so I thought I would check here.  This system is currently  
running stable from 45 days ago built from source.  I cvsuped 4  
hours ago.


# make installkernel KERNCONF=SMP-COCO

=== nullfs (install)
install -o root -g wheel -m 555   nullfs.ko /boot/kernel
=== nve (install)
install -o root -g wheel -m 555   if_nve.ko /boot/kernel
=== nvram (install)
install -o root -g wheel -m 555   nvram.ko /boot/kernel
install: nvram.ko: No such file or directory
*** Error code 71

Stop in /usr/src/sys/modules/nvram.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/src/sys/modules.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP-COCO.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/src.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/src.


___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any 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]

Re: 5 to 6

[Dan Mack]

On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Randy Bush wrote:


for the record, i followed the recipe in UPDATING and it worked.

randy


Another for the record ...

I upgraded my production box from 5.3 to 6.2BETA2 without incident as 
well.  I was surprised that all my services started properly on the first 
boot (postfix; cyrus imap, apache22, postgres, mongrel(ruby on rails), 
and various others..)


After the upgrade, rebuilding some of my ports improved the performance 
of my ruby on rails apps by a lot.  I'm not sure if I am benefiting from 
improved SMP code compared to 5.3 or if it was due to something unrelated 
in the ports tree.


This was on an older SMP Pentium 3 system which doesn't have any devices 
using the em driver and so far the system has been rock solid.


Dan
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: any ideas when 5.5 will be out

[Dan Mack]

Thanks for that info.

The release engineering page should be updated to reflect this.  The last 
time I looked (yesterday), it read that 5.5 will be out in September 2005.


Dan

On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Kris Kennaway wrote:


On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 12:21:31PM -0500, Eriq wrote:

I haven't noticed any word on this release, just 6.0


A few months after 6.0 is released.

Kris


___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Machine Replication

[Dan Mack]

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Eli K. Breen wrote:


All,

Does anyone have a good handle on how to replicate (read: image) a freebsd 
machine from one machine to an ostensibly similar machine?


So far I've used countless variations and combinations of the following:

dd  (Slow, not usefull if the hardware isn't identical?)
tar (Doesn't replicate MBR)
rsync   (No MBR support)
Norton Ghost(Doesn't support UFS/UFS2?)
G4U (little experience with this)


snip

Is there a jumpstart (solaris), kickstart (redhat linux), roboinst (irix),
or ignite (hpux) like auto-installer for BSD?

If there was, then I wouldn't image the disk at all, I'd instead setup up 
custom network images that I could blast to any system just by pxebooting 
it.  I'm not sure if it is possible with FreeBSD though, anyone?


Dan
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]