Quoting "Chris H." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Quoting chris# <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Greetings all,
As the title of this message indicates; I'm struggling with the ability
of getting the Xorg server running on a recent build of FreeBSD 7.
Of likely interest:
###
kernel info (2 proc pentium3):
7
TB --- 2008-01-19 03:04:56 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-19 03:04:56 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for sparc64/sparc64
TB --- 2008-01-19 03:04:56 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 03:04:58 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 03:04:58 - /
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:58:05 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:58:05 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for powerpc/powerpc
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:58:05 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:58:08 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:58:08 - /
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:48:03 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:48:03 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:48:03 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:48:07 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:48:07 - /usr/bi
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:37:28 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:37:28 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for i386/pc98
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:37:28 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:37:33 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:37:33 - /usr/bi
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:26:56 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:26:56 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for i386/i386
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:26:57 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:27:02 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:27:02 - /usr/bi
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:15:04 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:15:04 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for amd64/amd64
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:15:04 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:15:10 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-19 02:15:10 - /usr/
Quoting chris# <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Greetings all,
As the title of this message indicates; I'm struggling with the ability
of getting the Xorg server running on a recent build of FreeBSD 7.
Of likely interest:
###
kernel info (2 proc pentium3):
7.0-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 7.0-PRERELEASE #0: W
I think the dump I can see is output of an execution loop in
ext2_linux_balloc.c (/usr/src/sys/gnu/fs/ext2fs) from 289 (repeat: label) to
414 (goto repeat:). But I haven't found yet why in previous branch it is ok.
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:44:07 +0100
Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jakub
Jakub Siroky wrote:
I have two large ext2fs partitions (368 and 313GB) to hold data shared between several OSes. While there were no problems on 6-STABLE branch I was quite
disappointed after upgrade to 7-STABLE. Whenever I copy/write to ext2fs
partition the system freezes totally without crash
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Tancsa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I am also testing a core2 and quad core box with 8 gig of RAM on a 4
port Areca controller that will replace a 6.2 postgresql server next
week some time. Just doing some benchmarking/testing of that now and
hope to have RELEN
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Tancsa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I am also testing a core2 and quad core box with 8 gig of RAM on a 4
port Areca controller that will replace a 6.2 postgresql server next
week some time. Just doing some benchmarking/testing of that now and
hope to have RELEN
s3raphi wrote, on 1/18/2008 12:19 PM:
I am trying to run freebsd-update on 7.0-RC1 on a system with a ZFS root and
am also having problems with flags:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# freebsd-update install
Installing updates...chflags: ///lib/libc.so.7: Operation not supported
Is there a workaround for t
At 04:48 PM 1/18/2008, Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 04:11 PM 1/18/2008, Steven Hartland wrote:
I know 7 has had a lot of work done on locking and ULE but are there
any other reasons to go for that instead of 6.3? Conversely are there
any reason which would point away from 7 such as stability issues?
Greetings all,
As the title of this message indicates; I'm struggling with the ability
of getting the Xorg server running on a recent build of FreeBSD 7.
Of likely interest:
###
kernel info (2 proc pentium3):
7.0-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 7.0-PRERELEASE #0: Wed Jan 16 18:39:53 PST 2008
Installed
At 05:06 PM 1/18/2008, Jakub Siroky wrote:
Hello, please could you try to make large (hundred of GB) ext2 volume with
I dont use ext2 anywhere. Only UFS2.
---Mike
e2fsprogs and copy large amount of data to it? On amd64 SMP (two
cores) RELENG_7_0 it should lead to unrecoverable panic
Hello, please could you try to make large (hundred of GB) ext2 volume with
e2fsprogs and copy large amount of data to it? On amd64 SMP (two cores)
RELENG_7_0 it should lead to unrecoverable panic or scrolling strings
"ext2_new_block: bit already set for block %d". On 6.2-STABLE there is no
prob
Steven Hartland wrote:
With the announcement of 6.3 and with 7.0 looking like it wont be far
behind I'd interested to hear what people thought of the relative
benefits of each where?
I know 7 has had a lot of work done on locking and ULE but are there
any other reasons to go for that instead of
> The patch would be the same, it tried to fix an issue where if the table is
> longer than the space we are borrowing to map things we could end up with
> problems. I.e. the changes weren't in the RSDT/XSDT path at all, but in the
> common code used to map tables. If you are using RSDT, then
> I know 7 has had a lot of work done on locking and ULE but are there
> any other reasons to go for that instead of 6.3? Conversely are there
> any reason which would point away from 7 such as stability issues?
7 is great - very stable, fast, includes ZFS, has gcc 4.0 and is excellent
in my opini
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 03:51:43PM -0500, Ken Smith wrote:
> Due to resource limitations (both human and computer) there won't
> be an ia64 6.3-RELEASE but there will be an ia64 7.0-RELEASE.
Unless something changes rapidly, ia64-7 will not have any packages
shipped with it: the last I tried, it w
At 04:11 PM 1/18/2008, Steven Hartland wrote:
I know 7 has had a lot of work done on locking and ULE but are there
any other reasons to go for that instead of 6.3? Conversely are there
any reason which would point away from 7 such as stability issues?
I think it depends what apps you run, what
I am trying to run freebsd-update on 7.0-RC1 on a system with a ZFS root and
am also having problems with flags:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# freebsd-update install
Installing updates...chflags: ///lib/libc.so.7: Operation not supported
Is there a workaround for this?
-S3raphi
thompsa wrote:
>
> O
One word: ZFS! It's awesome.
-Joe
Steven Hartland wrote:
> With the announcement of 6.3 and with 7.0 looking like it wont be
> far behind I'd interested to hear what people thought of the relative
> benefits of each where?
>
> I know 7 has had a lot of work done on locking and ULE but
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steven Hartland wrote:
> With the announcement of 6.3 and with 7.0 looking like it wont be far
> behind I'd interested to hear what people thought of the relative
> benefits of each where?
>
> I know 7 has had a lot of work done on locking and ULE but
With the announcement of 6.3 and with 7.0 looking like it wont be
far behind I'd interested to hear what people thought of the relative
benefits of each where?
I know 7 has had a lot of work done on locking and ULE but are there
any other reasons to go for that instead of 6.3? Conversely are the
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:56:07 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:56:07 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for sparc64/sparc64
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:56:07 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:56:19 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:56:20 - /
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:49:54 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:49:54 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for powerpc/powerpc
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:49:54 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:50:09 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:50:09 - /
On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 07:47 +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 02:18:40PM -0500, Ken Smith wrote:
> > http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.3R/announce.html
>
> Thank you.
>
> One question: What has happened to iA64? I notice it has been removed
> from the release notes. Is it r
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:39:33 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:39:33 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:39:33 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:39:50 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:39:50 - /usr/bi
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 02:18:40PM -0500, Ken Smith wrote:
> http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.3R/announce.html
Thank you.
One question: What has happened to iA64? I notice it has been removed
from the release notes. Is it running late or dead?
--
Peter Jeremy
Please excuse any delays as the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ken,
After CVSuping newvers.sh still tells me I am using the prerelease
Jack
- - Original Message -
From: "Ken Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "freebsd-stable"
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 8:18 PM
Subject: FreeBSD 6.3-RELEASE Available
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:28:51 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:28:51 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for i386/pc98
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:28:51 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:29:06 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:29:06 - /usr/bi
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:05:32 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:05:32 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for amd64/amd64
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:05:32 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:05:59 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:05:59 - /usr/
On Friday 18 January 2008 01:02:04 pm Pete French wrote:
> > So it appears to be dying here:
> >
> > (gdb) l *madt_probe+0x119
> > 0xc06e7c69 is in madt_probe (/usr/src/sys/i386/acpica/madt.c:241).
> > 236 if (xsdt == NULL) {
> > 237 if (bootverbose)
On Friday 18 January 2008 11:48:10 am Pete French wrote:
> > So it appears to be dying here:
> >
> > (gdb) l *madt_probe+0x119
> > 0xc06e7c69 is in madt_probe (/usr/src/sys/i386/acpica/madt.c:241).
> > 236 if (xsdt == NULL) {
> > 237 if (bootverbose)
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:17:43 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:17:43 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for i386/i386
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:17:43 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:18:09 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2008-01-18 20:18:09 - /usr/bi
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 21:21 +0100, Jack Raats wrote:
> After CVSuping newvers.sh still tells me I am using the prerelease
You most likely used the RELENG_6 branch tag. At this point it should
have been the only one that would have produced 6.3-PRERELEASE.
I just changed it to say 6.3-STABLE.
Congrats!
Regards,
-Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri
Arab Portal
http://www.WeArab.Net/
- Original Message
> From: Ken Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: freebsd-stable
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 10:18:40 PM
> Subject: FreeBSD 6.3-RELEASE Available
>
>
> In case you aren't subscribed
In case you aren't subscribed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.3R/announce.html
--
Ken Smith
- From there to here, from here to | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
there, funny things are everywhere. |
Ulrich Spoerlein wrote:
On Jan 18, 2008 9:11 AM, Johan Ström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Your no,barely, bad hell no seems to fit pretty good.. I did some
testing during the night with the above (non-production) setup.
What I did was doing some rsyncing over the night:
while true ; do
e
> So it appears to be dying here:
>
> (gdb) l *madt_probe+0x119
> 0xc06e7c69 is in madt_probe (/usr/src/sys/i386/acpica/madt.c:241).
> 236 if (xsdt == NULL) {
> 237 if (bootverbose)
> 238 printf("MADT: Failed to map
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 20:50 +0100, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> Wayne Sierke wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 21:06 +0100, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >> Same deal as before then. It cannot be the same problem as in the
> >> previous 6.x trace (unless you are using a non-mpsafe filesystem, i.e.
> >> not UF
> So it appears to be dying here:
>
> (gdb) l *madt_probe+0x119
> 0xc06e7c69 is in madt_probe (/usr/src/sys/i386/acpica/madt.c:241).
> 236 if (xsdt == NULL) {
> 237 if (bootverbose)
> 238 printf("MADT: Failed to map
On Friday 18 January 2008 08:50:31 am John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday 18 January 2008 05:30:06 am Parv wrote:
> > There was no page fault or trap 12 message when the panic happened.
> > After some of messages are printed (as in dmesg), kdb is entered ...
> >
> > ioapic0: Assigning PCI IRQ 23 to
On Friday 18 January 2008 09:31:44 am Pete French wrote:
> > Just the stack trace offsets.
>
> is all the info you need here?
>
> http://toybox.twisted.org.uk/~pete/acpi_panic.jpg
Yep.
So it appears to be dying here:
(gdb) l *madt_probe+0x119
0xc06e7c69 is in madt_probe (/usr/src/sys/i386/acpi
> Just the stack trace offsets.
is all the info you need here?
http://toybox.twisted.org.uk/~pete/acpi_panic.jpg
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAI
On Thursday 17 January 2008 07:39:54 pm Pete French wrote:
> > MADT is the ACPI table that enumerates APICs. Do you have the offset of
> > madt_probe()?
>
> I am sujre I can get it for you - do I need to do anything special
> in DDB, or is it just the numbers in the bt that you are after ?
> I c
On Friday 18 January 2008 12:57:54 am Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 08:17:40AM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> >On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, John Baldwin wrote:
> >> amd64 uses link_elf_obj.c, all the other archs use link_elf.c, hence
> >> the duplication.
>
> Then why does amd64 need link
On Friday 18 January 2008 05:30:06 am Parv wrote:
> (Dropped Vivek K from recipient list; edited the URLs in my previous
> message.)
>
> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> wrote John Baldwin thusly...
> >
> > On Thursday 17 January 2008 06:05:17 am Parv wrote:
> ...
> > > Speaking of MSI being on b
> MADT is the ACPI table that enumerates APICs. Do you have the offset of
> madt_probe()?
I startet copying down the hex, but it turned out to be a more accurate idea
to get my colleague to take a photo with his camera phone. Panic and kdb
'bt' output can be found here:
http://toybox.twisted.or
Jakub Siroky wrote:
> I have two large ext2fs partitions (368 and 313GB) to hold data shared
> between several OSes. While there were no problems on 6-STABLE branch I was
> quite disappointed after upgrade to 7-STABLE. Whenever I copy/write to ext2fs
> partition the system freezes totally withou
I have two large ext2fs partitions (368 and 313GB) to hold data shared between
several OSes. While there were no problems on 6-STABLE branch I was quite
disappointed after upgrade to 7-STABLE. Whenever I copy/write to ext2fs
partition the system freezes totally without crashdump. So I set debugg
I wrote:
> Has anyone heard of or experienced any panics ("vput:
> negative ref cnt" or "vrele: negative ref cnt") when
> shutting down a box with more than one zpool?
After doing some testing I've come up with the following simple steps to
recreate the panic:
1. Create the pools and then export
Has anyone heard of or experienced any panics ("vput: negative ref cnt"
or "vrele: negative ref cnt") when shutting down a box with more than
one zpool?
I see this on an amd64 RELENG_7_0 (from yesterday) box:
syslogd: exiting on signal 15
panic: vrele: negative ref cnt
cpuid = 0
Uptime: 35m13s
P
(Dropped Vivek K from recipient list; edited the URLs in my previous
message.)
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
wrote John Baldwin thusly...
>
> On Thursday 17 January 2008 06:05:17 am Parv wrote:
...
> > Speaking of MSI being on by default in recent 6-STABLE ... well,
> > that caused my ThinkPad T
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
You'd be best off with RELENG_7 and not 6.3, but yes, the controller in
question should work on RELENG_6 and RELENG_6_3.
Very well, seems like I am going to give RELENG_7 a try then.
Thanks to everyone who replied!
--
>> Ferdinand Goldmann
>> Johannes Kepler University L
On Jan 18, 2008 9:11 AM, Johan Ström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your no,barely, bad hell no seems to fit pretty good.. I did some
> testing during the night with the above (non-production) setup.
> What I did was doing some rsyncing over the night:
>
> while true ; do
> echo "`date` Clea
On Jan 17, 2008, at 09:30 , Ulrich Spoerlein wrote:
On Jan 17, 2008 1:31 AM, Johan Ström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Export the disk on the backup server with ggated. Bind it on the
client
with ggatec. Slap a GELI or GBDE encryption on top of it and then
put a
ZFS on top of it.
You can mount/im
59 matches
Mail list logo
