on 18/08/2011 02:15 Steven Hartland said the following:
- Original Message - From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
Thanks to the debug that Steven provided and to the help that I received from
Kostik, I think that now I understand the basic mechanics of this panic, but,
unfortunately,
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
Thats interesting, are you using http as an example or is that something thats
been gleaned from the debugging of our output? I ask as there's only one process
running in each of our jails and thats a single java process.
It's
Hi!
I just tried you patch on latest current with clang.
[root@current64 /usr/src]# uname -a
FreeBSD current64 9.0-BETA1 FreeBSD 9.0-BETA1 #0: Thu Aug 18 03:56:45 MSK
2011 mox@current64:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
[root@current64 /usr/src]# patch ~/nvi2-freebsd-2011-08-17.diff
on 18/08/2011 13:35 Steven Hartland said the following:
- Original Message - From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
Thats interesting, are you using http as an example or is that something
thats
been gleaned from the debugging of our output? I ask as there's only one
process
running
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
Probably I have mistakenly assumed that the 'prison' in prison_derefer() has
something to do with an actual jail, while it could have been just prison0 where
all non-jailed processes belong.
That makes sense as this particular
on 18/08/2011 14:11 Andriy Gapon said the following:
Probably I have mistakenly assumed that the 'prison' in prison_derefer() has
something to do with an actual jail, while it could have been just prison0
where
all non-jailed processes belong.
So, indeed:
(kgdb) p $2-p_ucred-cr_prison
$10 =
On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 15:15 -0700, Test Rat wrote:
Have you tried the patch in misc/159666 ?
Committed to -current svn R 224978.
thanks for the patch!
Sean
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
Some latest hard drives have logical sectors of 512 byte when they
actually have 4k physical sectors. Here is the document describing what
to do in such case:
http://ivoras.net/blog/tree/2011-01-01.freebsd-on-4k-sector-drives.html .
For UFS: newfs -U -f 4096 /dev/da0
For ZFS: gnop create -S
Em... I can't reproduce this. Can you post your make.conf and src.conf?
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:30 AM, timp tim...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
I just tried you patch on latest current with clang.
[root@current64 /usr/src]# uname -a
FreeBSD current64 9.0-BETA1 FreeBSD 9.0-BETA1 #0: Thu Aug 18
on 17/08/2011 23:21 Andriy Gapon said the following:
It seems like everything starts with some kind of a race between terminating
processes in a jail and termination of the jail itself. This is where the
details are very thin so far. What we see is that a process (http) is in
exit(2) syscall,
2011/8/18 Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org:
on 17/08/2011 23:21 Andriy Gapon said the following:
It seems like everything starts with some kind of a race between
terminating
processes in a jail and termination of the jail itself. This is where the
details are very thin so far. What we see is
Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 01:09:32PM +0100, Matt Burke wrote:
How does the build process know about the non-symlinked path anyway?
I can't see where (or understand why) it uses pwd -P
Make(1)'s .OBJDIR is used:
{{{
.OBJDIR A path to the directory where the targets are built. At
timp tim...@gmail.com writes:
Hi!
I just tried you patch on latest current with clang.
[root@current64 /usr/src]# uname -a
FreeBSD current64 9.0-BETA1 FreeBSD 9.0-BETA1 #0: Thu Aug 18 03:56:45 MSK
2011 mox@current64:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
[root@current64 /usr/src]# patch
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Test Rat ttse...@gmail.com wrote:
timp tim...@gmail.com writes:
Hi!
I just tried you patch on latest current with clang.
[root@current64 /usr/src]# uname -a
FreeBSD current64 9.0-BETA1 FreeBSD 9.0-BETA1 #0: Thu Aug 18 03:56:45 MSK
2011
14 matches
Mail list logo
