now now :-)
On Wed, 12 May 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> Maybe whoever committed the supposedly innocuous dev_t changes should
> back it out.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> -Matt
> Matthew Dillon
>
Maybe everybody should read to the end of their mailboxes before
they come forward with baseless and unfounded snide remarks.
And I never said they were "innocuous". This is Current mind you.
Poul-Henning
In message <199905122048.naa88...@apollo.backplane.com>, Matthew Dillon writes:
>Mayb
Maybe whoever committed the supposedly innocuous dev_t changes should
back it out.
Just a thought.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
:
:It looks like something has come unstuck
It looks like something has come unstuck:
Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode
mp_lock = 0002; cpuid = 0; lapic.id =
fault virtual address = 0x28
fault code = supervisor read, page not present
instruction pointer = 0x8:0xc017bb67
stack pointer =
