On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Nate Williams wrote:
Only in very rare cases do we run into a problem where we have to create
a branch. In that case, the developer responsible for the release
creates a branch from his checked out tree (there's no law against
creating a branch from sources that are
At 2:17 PM -0500 3/15/02, Robert Watson wrote:
My feeling is that at this point, we probably should just use
Perforce due to limitations in CVS.
This seems fine to me. I am uneasy about perforce in cases
where someone is developing something which is *meant* to be
merged back into the main
Murray Stokely wrote:
On March 15, a RELENG_5_0_DP1 branch will be created in CVS for
final release polishing. This will allow us to provide translated
release notes, sync up sysinstall and the package set, bump version
numbers, and tweak default diagnostic settings without further
[Trimming Cc list a little bit]
If memory serves me right, Peter Wemm wrote:
Actually, with my CVS hat on, I have a *huge* problem with this.
In the future, if you see such huge problems come up, a little more
advance notice might be nice. :-(
We have a large number of temporary repo
Bruce A. Mah [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Differences of opinion on naming aside...the branch isn't supposed to
last long at all. The point is to provide a slightly polished snapshot
to the wider developer community. We can't do the QA/releng work on
HEAD without calling for a code freeze
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
I can't imagine why anyone would expect to cvsup this thing at some
point in the distant future
Rule number one of release engineering... user's will do all kinds
of wacky stuff that you would never expect them to do, and complain
bitterly when
On 15 Mar 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Bruce A. Mah [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Differences of opinion on naming aside...the branch isn't supposed to
last long at all. The point is to provide a slightly polished snapshot
to the wider developer community. We can't do the QA/releng
Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's worth noting, BTW, that originally the release engineering team
planned to use Perforce for this to avoid the branch issue entirely,
minimize impact on the main tree, etc, but decided not to due to the high
volume of complaints on the topic.
If it
On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 03:32:00AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Bruce A. Mah [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Differences of opinion on naming aside...the branch isn't supposed to
last long at all. The point is to provide a slightly polished snapshot
to the wider developer community. We
On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 04:40:08PM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
If this is going to be a static release (calling it RELENG_5_anything is
a mistake IMHO) then this isn't a big deal. But if people are expecting
it to have ongoing secirity fixes etc like we do with RELENG_4_5 etc then
we have a
On 08-Mar-02 Wilko Bulte wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 01:35:47PM -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote:
And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes freeze up.
Yes. Or panic. See my posts earlier this week. I managed to get
2 buildworlds without accidents, but all make release attempts
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Matthew Jacob wrote:
And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes freeze up.
I managed to panic my 4-cpu 4100 yesterday with a 'make -j8 buildworld'
I'm going to look at that today.
--
Doug Rabson Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Chris Hedley wrote:
... about a crash ...
Just in case anyone needs to know, I had another couple of panics today
when trying to newfs_msdos /dev/fd0, seems something in readdisklabel
isn't too happy.
Chris.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe
I'm able to compile kdelibs now, no problem as well as QT, but when I run
configure on kdebase it locks my system up. I can switch terminals but
that's it. It locks up on configure when detecting QT(I believe line 5612).
The first time it did this I decided that was because I need to rebuild
As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of major components are still
in progress, but a great deal of work has already been accomplished,
and could benefit from the
Should I postpone my allocator commit then?
Thanks,
Jeff
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
To this end, we would like to request that commits for the next 7
days to HEAD be made with special care. -CURRENT is in pretty good
shape right now, so we're not requiring approval for all commits.
I have a Perl-5.6.1 upgrade. Is that too risky? Apart from the perl
stuff itself, there are
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 11:16:53 +, Mark Murray wrote:
To this end, we would like to request that commits for the next 7
days to HEAD be made with special care. -CURRENT is in pretty good
shape right now, so we're not requiring approval for all commits.
I have a Perl-5.6.1
To this end, we would like to request that commits for the next 7
days to HEAD be made with special care. -CURRENT is in pretty good
shape right now, so we're not requiring approval for all commits.
I have a Perl-5.6.1 upgrade. Is that too risky? Apart from the perl
stuff itself,
As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of major components are still
in progress, but a great deal of work has already been accomplished,
and could benefit from
Does this include getting someone to fix picobsd for -CURRENT?
Is this important for the snapshots?
Later,
George
*** Making static libraries
cd /home/gnn/FreeBSD/src.latest/lib/csu/i386-elf; make depend; make all;
make
install
rm -f .depend
mkdep -f .depend -a -nostdinc
As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of major components are still
in progress, but a great deal of work has already been accomplished,
and could benefit
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of major components are still
in progress, but a great deal of work
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 08:59:53AM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of major components are still
in progress, but a
currently kde doesn't work due to binuntils update. It may work now
after the most recent binutils update, but we have to recompile kde to
see that I believe, andkdelibs cannot be compiled which builds
kde-config which the rest of the kde meta-ports try to run.
I think that last
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 10:17:16AM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
currently kde doesn't work due to binuntils update. It may work now
after the most recent binutils update, but we have to recompile kde to
see that I believe, andkdelibs cannot be compiled which builds
kde-config
currently kde doesn't work due to binuntils update. It may work now
after the most recent binutils update, but we have to recompile kde
to see that I believe, andkdelibs cannot be compiled
which builds kde-config which the rest of the kde meta-ports try to
run.
I think that
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 11:20:35AM -0500, Will Andrews wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 10:17:16AM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
currently kde doesn't work due to binuntils update. It may work now
after the most recent binutils update, but we have to recompile kde to
see that I
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 10:17:16AM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
currently kde doesn't work due to binuntils update. It may work now
after the most recent binutils update, but we have to recompile kde to
see that I believe, andkdelibs cannot be compiled which builds
kde-config
Sounds to me like there are fixes in the pipeline from Mike and Thomas.
Hopefully they'll get that committed in the next day or two so that KDE
can be happy on -CURRENT before the snapshot.
Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project
[EMAIL PROTECTED] NAI Labs,
There seem to be two distinct problems. The header one seems to have
resolution,I got around it by the nested include. The second one may
be OBJPRELINK, but does seem to be nailed down yet. Martin Blapp ran into
what might be related problems in the OpenOffice port. I've only seen it
on g++
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
Hmm. My impression was that the libpng stuff had been fixed, could you
confirm that KDE still doesn't build on 5.0-CURRENT?
Its not related to libpng, I believe that has been fixed, but I
cannot tell for sure because kde cannot be compiled
At 10:17 AM -0600 3/8/02, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
Yes. Recent changes to netinet/in.h have made it require the
inclusion of arpa/inet.h. As well, arpa/inet.h must include
netinet/in.h. IOW, each of these files must #include the
other in order to work correctly.
As you might guess, this is a
I'm surprised that everyone hasn't complained about world breakage
from this. It has been broken for almost 2 weeks now. Everything
that goes near ntohl and has WARNS = 2 fails to compile. Without
WARNS, the bug is reported as above, but a bogus version of __hton*
is found in the library
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Murray Stokely wrote:
As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of major components are still
in progress, but a great deal of work has already
At 4:57 AM +1100 3/9/02, Bruce Evans wrote:
I'm surprised that everyone hasn't complained about world breakage
from this. It has been broken for almost 2 weeks now. Everything
that goes near ntohl and has WARNS = 2 fails to compile. Without
WARNS, the bug is reported as above, but a bogus
And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes freeze up.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 01:35:47PM -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote:
And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes freeze up.
Yes. Or panic. See my posts earlier this week. I managed to get
2 buildworlds without accidents, but all make release attempts either
paniced or froze.
--
| / o /
Sorry- couldn't see your posts. Majordomo bounced my resubscribe request to
the list owner who seems to not to have gotten it.
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Wilko Bulte wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 01:35:47PM -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote:
And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes freeze
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Murray Stokely wrote:
As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed
to releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT
on or around April 1, 2002.
Will this release include some kind of bootable-install support
for any new hardware
Joel Wilsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 08:59:53AM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of
[ Could we CC a few more lists? I'm not sure everyone that uses
FreeBSD has read this yet. :) ]
David W. Chapman Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Its not related to libpng, I believe that has been fixed, but I
cannot tell for sure because kde cannot be compiled under -current.
I'm not the
Hmm. This should be non-fatal in any event, but which header does it
include to get it's htons() and htonl() prototypes? netinet/in.h,
arpa/inet.h, or sys/param.h?
Yes. Recent changes to netinet/in.h have made it require the inclusion
of arpa/inet.h. As well, arpa/inet.h must include
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Murray Stokely wrote:
As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed
to releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT
on or around April 1, 2002.
Will this release include some kind of bootable-install
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Murray Stokely wrote:
As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed
to releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT
on or around April 1, 2002.
Will this
Matthew Jacob writes:
And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes freeze up.
I suggest reverting rev 1.61 of alpha/alpha/interrupt.c (eg, disable
interrupt thread preemption). I'm on the west coast right now, away
from my alphas, but I had several buildworlds complete last week
Apparently, On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 05:33:28PM -0500,
Garance A Drosihn said words to the effect of;
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Murray Stokely wrote:
As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed
to releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT
on or
Yes, Peter also suggested this.
Alas, at some point over the last couple of days, something also broke so that
polled mailbox commands for ISP are now broken. Dunno why. *shrug*
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
Matthew Jacob writes:
And FWIW, alpha kernels on some
Jake Burkholder wrote:
Will this release include some kind of bootable-install support
for any new hardware platforms, such as sparc64? (this snapshot
is meant to be available as some kind of CD-package, right?)
Yes, absolutely.
Wow.
This is really impressive.
I thought it wasn't
Apparently, On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 04:12:47PM -0800,
Terry Lambert said words to the effect of;
Jake Burkholder wrote:
Will this release include some kind of bootable-install support
for any new hardware platforms, such as sparc64? (this snapshot
is meant to be available as
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 02:17:24AM -0800, Murray Stokely wrote:
To this end, we would like to request that commits for the next 7
days to HEAD be made with special care. -CURRENT is in pretty good
shape right now, so we're not requiring approval for all commits.
Some of the 5.x package
David W. Chapman Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmm. This should be non-fatal in any event, but which header does it
include to get it's htons() and htonl() prototypes? netinet/in.h,
arpa/inet.h, or sys/param.h?
Yes. Recent changes to netinet/in.h have made it require the inclusion
Mike Barcroft [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe not. I think missing prototypes might be fatal in C++.
Yes.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Maybe not. I think missing prototypes might be fatal in C++. If this
is the case, my new endian patch will fix this. Try compiling KDE
after installing a world with the following patch applied:
http://people.FreeBSD.org/~mike/patches/endian-ng3.diff
I plan on committing this on Sunday.
At 6:32 PM -0600 3/8/02, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
Try compiling KDE after installing a world with the
following patch applied:
http://people.FreeBSD.org/~mike/patches/endian-ng3.diff
I plan on committing this on Sunday.
I don't know if its related to this patch, but I get this
I don't know if its related to this patch, but I get this
when I buildworld now
I just did a complete buildworld + installworld with no
trouble, and I then added the above patch and did another
complete buildworld + installworld. I had no problems with
either build.
Applying the above
56 matches
Mail list logo
