TB --- 2010-08-24 05:33:59 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-08-24 05:33:59 - starting RELENG_8 tinderbox run for amd64/amd64
TB --- 2010-08-24 05:33:59 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 05:34:52 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 05:34:52 -
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:20:35 +0200, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Monday, August 23, 2010 2:44:38 am Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 23/08/2010 05:05 Dan Langille said the following:
On 8/22/2010 9:18 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
What does this mean?
kernel: MCA: Bank 4, Status
TB --- 2010-08-24 05:59:45 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-08-24 05:59:45 - starting RELENG_8 tinderbox run for arm/arm
TB --- 2010-08-24 05:59:45 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:00:09 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:00:09 -
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:10:58 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:10:58 - starting RELENG_8 tinderbox run for i386/i386
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:10:58 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:11:43 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:11:43 -
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:30:41 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:30:41 - starting RELENG_8 tinderbox run for i386/pc98
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:30:41 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:31:20 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:31:20 -
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:46:26 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:46:26 - starting RELENG_8 tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:46:26 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:47:12 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 06:47:12 -
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:01:13 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:01:13 - starting RELENG_8 tinderbox run for mips/mips
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:01:13 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:01:39 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:01:39 -
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:09:24 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:09:24 - starting RELENG_8 tinderbox run for powerpc/powerpc
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:09:24 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:10:39 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:10:39 -
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:18:29 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:18:29 - starting RELENG_8 tinderbox run for sparc64/sparc64
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:18:29 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:19:19 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2010-08-24 07:19:19 -
on 24/08/2010 09:14 Ronald Klop said the following:
A little off topic, but what is 'a low rate of corrected ECC errors'? At work
one machine has them like ones per day, but runs ok. Is ones per day much?
That's up to your judgment. It's like after how many remapped sectors do you
replace
At 05:04 PM 8/20/2010, Mike Tancsa wrote:
The box is a moderately busy LNS running mpd5. I have another box
running the same load that has not crashed so I am wondering if its
hardware or this box is just lucky ? its crashed a couple of times
now, but the watchdog rebooted it prior to the
On Monday, August 23, 2010 5:35:40 pm Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 08:20:35AM -0400 I heard the voice of
John Baldwin, and lo! it spake thus:
It is not private, it is in //depot/projects/mcelog/... in p4.
Which may as well be Siberia for us lowly non-developers. Any
IMHO the key here is whether hardware is broken or not. The only case
where correctable ECC errors are OK is when a bit gets flipped by a
high-energy particle. That's a normal but fairly rare event. If you
get bit flips often enough that you can recall details of more then
one of them on the same
on 24/08/2010 22:51 Artem Belevich said the following:
IMHO the key here is whether hardware is broken or not. The only case
where correctable ECC errors are OK is when a bit gets flipped by a
high-energy particle. That's a normal but fairly rare event. If you
get bit flips often enough that
Ronald,
your email address bounces, that's inconvenient.
Original Message
Subject: Returned mail: Service unavailable
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 23:03:33 +0300 (EEST)
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem mailer-dae...@citadel.icyb.net.ua
To: a...@icyb.net.ua
The original message was
On 8/22/2010 9:18 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
What does this mean?
kernel: MCA: Bank 4, Status 0x940c4001fe080813
kernel: MCA: Global Cap 0x0105, Status 0x
kernel: MCA: Vendor AuthenticAMD, ID 0xf5a, APIC ID 0
kernel: MCA: CPU 0 COR BUSLG Source RD Memory
kernel: MCA:
Hi,
I'm having trouble with a system on a Supermicro X7SPE-HF, it crashes
about once a day. I haven't found a way to trigger this yet.
The system has a bunch of VLANs on em1, it does routing between them.
Currently its running 8-STABLE but it happend with 8.1-RELEASE too.
greetings,
Philipp
#
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 07:13:23PM -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
On 8/22/2010 9:18 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
What does this mean?
kernel: MCA: Bank 4, Status 0x940c4001fe080813
kernel: MCA: Global Cap 0x0105, Status 0x
kernel: MCA: Vendor AuthenticAMD, ID 0xf5a, APIC
On 8/24/2010 7:38 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 07:13:23PM -0400, Dan Langille wrote:
On 8/22/2010 9:18 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
What does this mean?
kernel: MCA: Bank 4, Status 0x940c4001fe080813
kernel: MCA: Global Cap 0x0105, Status 0x
At 06:55 PM 8/24/2010, Philipp Wuensche wrote:
Hi,
I'm having trouble with a system on a Supermicro X7SPE-HF, it crashes
about once a day. I haven't found a way to trigger this yet.
The system has a bunch of VLANs on em1, it does routing between them.
Currently its running 8-STABLE but it
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:06:43AM -0400 I heard the voice of
John Baldwin, and lo! it spake thus:
It is actually public at perforce.freebsd.org. :) However, it is
tedious to download the files.
Oh, I'd apparently blocked out of my mind that you could clicky-clicky
files one at a time from
21 matches
Mail list logo
