Hi Rainer,
not sure why none of our email discussions went to the web.
Anyway, are you going to help us support gcc 4 in ON ?
Let's say branched from 4.1
> branch, so I'd suggest to concentrate on the latest stable GCC release
> (4.1.1 right now)
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_
Thanks, Anders. You have seconds. We'll contact you offline
to get you set up.
Eric
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006, Anders Persson wrote:
Several new RFCs (4293, 4022, 4113) have been published that specifies
updated MIBs for IP, ICMP, TCP and UDP. I propose a project to provide
support for the new MIBs.
Thanks, Victor. You have seconds. We'll contact you offline
to get you set up.
Eric
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006, Victor Li wrote:
Project Proposal: iSNS Server
I would like to propose the creation of a new project page for the
Solaris iSNS Server work. We are currently in the design stage of
this proj
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Michael Pogue wrote:
> Alexey Starovoytov wrote:
> > 'diff csl-sol210-3_4-branch gcc_343' should go into mainline, otherwise
> > we'll end up with 'sol' branches for every major gcc release ON care to
> > support.
> ..
> > The prerequisite for that is to have 'diff csl-sol
Alexey Starovoytov wrote:
> 'diff csl-sol210-3_4-branch gcc_343' should go into mainline, otherwise
> we'll end up with 'sol' branches for every major gcc release ON care to
> support.
..
> The prerequisite for that is to have 'diff csl-sol210-3_4-branch gcc_343'
> integrated into gcc trunk
O
Rainer Orth wrote:
> I don't see CodeSourcery being very active with GCC for Solaris
> work these days (maybe their contract has ended?)
No, their contract has not ended. (I am the initiator/manager of the contact
for the 3.4.3 compiler).
We just don't have a whole lot of bugs that need fixin
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Rainer Orth wrote:
> * Try to get as many of those changes as possible into gcc mainline, either
> for 4.2 or for 4.3 after 4.2 branches.
It cannot go into 4.2 apparently. I believe you're familiar with gcc policies.
> * Create two solaris vendor branches (this isn't a csl
Alexey,
> what exactly do you propose from technical side:
> create 3 gcc-csl branches and test ON on 4 compilers ?
no: I'd propose the following:
* Identify the changes currently local to the csl-sol210-3_4-branch branch
(which is the basis for the gcc 3.4.3 in sfw) necessary to build
OpenS
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Eric Boutilier wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jul 2006, Alexey Starovoytov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > In some sense this project is a supplement project to "support GCCfss and
> > gcc 4 in ON" project, but can be considered separately.
>
> Alexey,
>
> Are you proposing separate or shared pro
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Rainer Orth wrote:
> I think I asked this before when you announced GCCfss on the main gcc list:
> how much work would it be to turn GCCfss into a generic (i.e. both sparc
> and x86) GCC with the Sun backend? It seems that the backend interface is
> identical between sparc an
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Rainer Orth wrote:
> I think it would be unwise to base this on a sort of isolated branch of GCC
> development. As I've suggested before
> this should be done within the GCC community as much as possible, which is
> an important part of SFW as well: work with the upstream dev
On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 22:29 -0400, Sebastien Roy wrote:
> FYI, I believe there is work already underway to implement at least a
> subset of what this project is proposing to undertake. I've Cc'ed one
> of the engineers working on this to prevent duplication of effort. Rao,
> can you comment on wh
Sebastien Roy wrote:
On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 15:06 -0700, Anders Persson wrote:
Several new RFCs (4293, 4022, 4113) have been published that specifies
updated MIBs for IP, ICMP, TCP and UDP. I propose a project to provide
support for the new MIBs.
Some of the issues that need to be addressed
I've localized the boot hang on the DL585 to pci_boot.c:add_reg_props()
(see
http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/on/usr/src/uts/i86pc/io/pci/pci_boot.c#1166)
The hang always occurs when probing the first PCI-PCI bridge in the system.
On a hunch, I changed this line:
1166 pci_putw
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006, Alexey Starovoytov wrote:
Hi,
In some sense this project is a supplement project to "support GCCfss and gcc 4 in
ON" project, but can be considered separately.
Alexey,
Are you proposing separate or shared project space for your two
proposals?
Eric
GCCfss (GCC for SP
Dmitry wrote:
> I remind, what it hang not only boot, but and at work.
I understand you're seeing a run-time hang as well. Based on the
investigation of the boot-time hang so far, I believe these are
separate problems.
Dana
___
opensolaris-discuss mail
James Carlson wrote:
> Thomas Maier-Komor writes:
>>> and slog through the output to find the offender.
>>>
>> Great! I found it. It's hanging somewhere in NFS:
>
> That looks exactly like CR 6406650. Was this a forced unmount?
>
could be - this process is hanging since quite some time and I ju
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> swap 149192401104 14918136 1%/etc/svc/vol=
>> atile
>> swap 15365960 447832 14918128 3%/tmp
>> swap 14918208 80 14918128 1%/var/run
>>
>> What we are seeing here is that df reports diffe
James Carlson wrote:
> Thomas Maier-Komor writes:
>> James Carlson wrote:
>>> Thomas Maier-Komor writes:
Has anybody got some mdb magic at hand?
>>> Sure. If the PID is 1234 (decimal), do this:
>>>
0t1234::pid2proc | ::walk thread | ::findstack
>> Thanks. Looks like a good starter. But w
James Carlson wrote:
> Thomas Maier-Komor writes:
>> Has anybody got some mdb magic at hand?
>
> Sure. If the PID is 1234 (decimal), do this:
>
>> 0t1234::pid2proc | ::walk thread | ::findstack
>
Thanks. Looks like a good starter. But what can I do, if
$ 0t1234::pid2proc | ::walk thread
return
Several new RFCs (4293, 4022, 4113) have been published that specifies
updated MIBs for IP, ICMP, TCP and UDP. I propose a project to provide
support for the new MIBs.
Some of the issues that need to be addressed are:
- Per interface IP statistics for both v4 and v6 (currently that is only
don
Alexey Starovoytov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In some sense this project is a supplement project to "support GCCfss and gcc
> 4 in ON" project, but can be considered separately.
>
> GCCfss (GCC for SPARC Systems) is a big step forward on sparc comparing to
> /usr/sfw/bin/gcc.
> Higher perfor
>Somehow you are right. But "blocks in use" accounts against "swap", and
>swap is used by all those mount points.
Except that it isn't really "swap" but "available virtual memory".
>Finally, what is most important to me, the first number (i.e. swap
>total) looks broken to me, as a result of the
Thomas Maier-Komor writes:
> > and slog through the output to find the offender.
> >
>
> Great! I found it. It's hanging somewhere in NFS:
That looks exactly like CR 6406650. Was this a forced unmount?
> Is there a way to resolve this hanging CV? Or can one determine the NFS
> resource in ques
Alexey Starovoytov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since ON is buildable with /usr/sfw/bin/gcc 3.4, I'm proposing to make it
> buildable with GCCfss (GCC for SPARC Systems) on sparc and with plain gcc
> 4.0.x on x86.
>
> Because of the changes introduced in gcc version 4.0, ON didn't work with
>
Thomas Maier-Komor writes:
> James Carlson wrote:
> > Thomas Maier-Komor writes:
> >> Has anybody got some mdb magic at hand?
> >
> > Sure. If the PID is 1234 (decimal), do this:
> >
> >> 0t1234::pid2proc | ::walk thread | ::findstack
> >
>
> Thanks. Looks like a good starter. But what can I d
Thomas Maier-Komor writes:
> has anybody got an idea, how one could determine what the reason for
> a process might be to be unreapable. I.e. I have a process
> that turns up as in ps, but won't disappear with
> preap. Now I would like to find out, what the reason might be that
> it won't disappe
>swap 149192401104 14918136 1%/etc/svc/vol=
>atile
>swap 15365960 447832 14918128 3%/tmp
>swap 14918208 80 14918128 1%/var/run
>
>What we are seeing here is that df reports different sizes for swap, =
>which actuall
Hi everybody,
maybe somebody can explain me this behavior:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ df -F tmpfs -h
Dateisystem Größe belegt verfügbar Kapazität Eingehängt auf
swap14G 1,1M14G 1%/etc/svc/volatile
swap15G 437M14G 3%/tmp
swap
Hi,
has anybody got an idea, how one could determine what the reason for a
process might be to be unreapable. I.e. I have a process that turns
up as in ps, but won't disappear with preap. Now I would like to find
out, what the reason might be that it won't disappear. Maybe then it would be
p
I remind, what it hang not only boot, but and at work.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
31 matches
Mail list logo
