On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Glen Barber wrote:
>>
>> I'd blame this one:
>>
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head/2012-September/040236.html
>>
>
> Yes, reverting that commit allows the system to boot.
>
Hi,
Same problem on my side (under Virtualbox or on an IBM 3550 M2).
Rega
Am 09/12/12 09:30, schrieb Olivier Cochard-Labbé:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Glen Barber wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd blame this one:
>>>
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head/2012-September/040236.html
>>>
>>
>> Yes, reverting that commit allows the system to boot.
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> Sa
on 12/09/2012 10:30 Olivier Cochard-Labbé said the following:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Glen Barber wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd blame this one:
>>>
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head/2012-September/040236.html
>>>
>>
>> Yes, reverting that commit allows the system to boot.
>>
>
>
Hello, Adrian.
You wrote 6 сентября 2012 г., 22:12:04:
AC> On 6 September 2012 11:11, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
>> Hello, Adrian.
>> You wrote 6 сентября 2012 г., 22:07:08:
>>
>> AC> Oh don't worry about polling just yet. I just want to see what
>> AC> preempt/no-preempt does with ULE and 4BSD on th
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:27:50AM +0200, Lars Engels wrote:
> At the moment the ports maintainers don't give much about if their ports
> build with CLANG or not because they're not forced to.
I think this is a mis-representation.
Adding the requirement "your ports must work on clang" is adding a
On 12 Sep 2012, at 10:15, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:27:50AM +0200, Lars Engels wrote:
>> At the moment the ports maintainers don't give much about if their ports
>> build with CLANG or not because they're not forced to.
>
> I think this is a mis-representation.
>
> Addin
On 09/11/2012 02:52 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
> So can we do a sweep on the ports tree and mark the 2232 ports with
> USE_GCC=4.2 until they can actually build with clang?
Unfortunately it isn't that simple. We already have a statistically
significant number of ports that don't even compile wit
On 09/11/2012 11:15 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:27:50AM +0200, Lars Engels wrote:
>> At the moment the ports maintainers don't give much about if their ports
>> build with CLANG or not because they're not forced to.
>
> I think this is a mis-representation.
>
> Adding the
Fwiw, I plan to fix this issue, but even if I didnt. This isnt
a problem in clang rather than in llvm asm. So it can be easily
worked around by CFLAGS+=-no-integrated-as.
Roman
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:22:44PM +0200, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
> Le Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:12:07 -0500,
> Brooks Davis
We tested kernel built by gonzo@, there working framebuffer, ue0, and
USB2.0 devices (in theory, I didn't have those).
But after some activity (like download few megabytes file) all is stuck
with message
usb device stalled
This is getting 100% repeatedly, no matter if download goes to sd card, or
Hi,
For whatever reason, I'd like to start services, from a properly formed
rc.d script, configured via /etc/rc.conf, etc. with a custom "nice"
value. Is there already support for this?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For whatever reason, I'd like to start services, from a properly formed
> rc.d script, configured via /etc/rc.conf, etc. with a custom "nice"
> value. Is there already support for this?
>
rc.subr indicates you can use ${name}_nice for
On 12/09/2012 12:31, Ivan Voras wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For whatever reason, I'd like to start services, from a properly formed
> rc.d script, configured via /etc/rc.conf, etc. with a custom "nice"
> value. Is there already support for this?
... nevermind, I found it's already there in rc.subr, just not
Den 12/09/2012 kl. 11.29 skrev Doug Barton :
> On 09/11/2012 02:52 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
>> So can we do a sweep on the ports tree and mark the 2232 ports with
>> USE_GCC=4.2 until they can actually build with clang?
>
> Unfortunately it isn't that simple. We already have a statistically
>
Hi,
Has anyone recently built FreeBSD10-current with clang on a FreeBSD9
amd64 system?
I've bumped into a number of issues. Mainly, buildworld picks up the old
system includes, which miss newly introduced symbols; same thing with
libraries. I fixed that by pointing compiler and linker to
/usr/ob
On 2012-09-12 12:46, Edward Meewis wrote:
Has anyone recently built FreeBSD10-current with clang on a FreeBSD9
amd64 system?
I've bumped into a number of issues. Mainly, buildworld picks up the old
system includes, which miss newly introduced symbols; same thing with
libraries. I fixed that by p
On 09/11/2012 05:03 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:10:13PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>>
>> However, I think the majority of users can get by just fine using clang,
>> right now. Doug Barton even confirmed in this thread that 80% of our
>> ports already work with it!
>
> He
Hi Dimitry,
On 12-09-12 13:09, Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 2012-09-12 12:46, Edward Meewis wrote:
Has anyone recently built FreeBSD10-current with clang on a FreeBSD9
amd64 system?
I've bumped into a number of issues. Mainly, buildworld picks up the old
system includes, which miss newly introduce
On 12 Sep 2012, at 10:09, Doug Barton wrote:
> Also, users who actually are helping with testing clang for ports
> continue to report runtime problems, even with things that build fine.
I hope that you are encouraging maintainers of ports that don't work as
expected with clang to submit bug repo
On 2012-09-12 13:45, Edward Meewis wrote:
...
I added the following lines to each individual Makefile it stumbled on:
CFLAGS+= -I/usr/obj/usr/home/emeewis/src/FreeBSD-HEAD/tmp/usr/include
LDADD+=-L/usr/obj/usr/home/emeewis/src/FreeBSD-HEAD/tmp/usr/lib
or:
LDFLAGS+=-L/usr/obj/usr/home/emeewis/sr
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 04:15:20AM -0500, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:27:50AM +0200, Lars Engels wrote:
> > At the moment the ports maintainers don't give much about if their ports
> > build with CLANG or not because they're not forced to.
>
> I think this is a mis-representat
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 03:03:43PM +0200, Lars Engels wrote:
> two of the ports I maintain don't build with CLANG, yet. I
> just checked that on the wiki page [1].
To repeat myself, the ports I've listed on that page are the "big
problems". People need to look at the errorlogs URLs up at the
top
Hello, Patrick.
You wrote 12 сентября 2012 г., 1:22:44:
PL> Well, I will not be able to run FreeBSD from scratch on my soekris :-)
Thank you for warning, I've missed this.
--
// Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing
On 12-09-12 14:15, Dimitry Andric wrote:
Try building with gcc, while removing the WITHOUT_GCC line, or building
with clang, while removing the WITHOUT_CLANG line.
I'll be damned, that did it! (with gcc)
Thanks, guys!
-- Ed.
___
freebsd-current@free
FreeBSD -current r240360 has a fatal trap at boot.
This has been noted on two machines running -current which were
updated using the recommended
buildworld update procedure.
Booting in single-user mode is possible and booting with the previous
kernel, r240327M from ~ 09-10-12,
is also possible an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/12/12 11:48, Kim Culhan wrote:
> FreeBSD -current r240360 has a fatal trap at boot.
SVN r240367 reverts the troublesome change,
imb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (FreeBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAlBQr+IACgkQQv9rrgRC1JKkSQ
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:48:45AM -0400, Kim Culhan wrote:
> FreeBSD -current r240360 has a fatal trap at boot.
> ...
As noted yesterday, yes. You need to either revert r240344 or apply
r240367 (which reverts r240344).
FWIW, I had no trouble at r240388.
Peace,
david
--
David H. Wolfskill
On 2012-09-12 17:31, Edward Meewis wrote:
On 12-09-12 14:15, Dimitry Andric wrote:
Try building with gcc, while removing the WITHOUT_GCC line, or building
with clang, while removing the WITHOUT_CLANG line.
I'll be damned, that did it! (with gcc)
Note that some people have been working on ext
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 06:18:06PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2012-09-12 17:31, Edward Meewis wrote:
> > On 12-09-12 14:15, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> >> Try building with gcc, while removing the WITHOUT_GCC line, or building
> >> with clang, while removing the WITHOUT_CLANG line.
> >
> > I'll
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Michael Butler
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 09/12/12 11:48, Kim Culhan wrote:
>> FreeBSD -current r240360 has a fatal trap at boot.
>
> SVN r240367 reverts the troublesome change,
>
> imb
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:57 AM
On Wednesday 12 September 2012 12:24:58 Alexander Yerenkow wrote:
> We tested kernel built by gonzo@, there working framebuffer, ue0, and
> USB2.0 devices (in theory, I didn't have those).
> But after some activity (like download few megabytes file) all is stuck
> with message
> usb device stalled
On 9/12/2012 12:40 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
> Den 12/09/2012 kl. 11.29 skrev Doug Barton :
>
>> On 09/11/2012 02:52 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
>>> So can we do a sweep on the ports tree and mark the 2232 ports
>>> with USE_GCC=4.2 until they can actually build with clang?
>>
>> Unfortunately
On 9/12/2012 1:49 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 12 Sep 2012, at 10:09, Doug Barton wrote:
>
>> Also, users who actually are helping with testing clang for ports
>> continue to report runtime problems, even with things that build fine.
>
> I hope that you are encouraging maintainers of ports that
On 09/11/12 09:56, Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 2012-09-11 16:27, Tijl Coosemans wrote:> On 11-09-2012 16:10,
Dimitry Andric wrote:
...
Yes, maths support, specifically precision, is admittedly still one of
clang's (really llvm's) weaker points. It is currently not really a
high priority item for
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
> So can we do a sweep on the ports tree and mark the 2232 ports with
> USE_GCC=4.2 until they can actually build with clang? This could allow
> the clang switch to proceed. Hopefully, waiting for GCC to compile just
> to install some tiny port will b
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 04:42:27PM -0500, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> On 09/11/12 09:56, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> >On 2012-09-11 16:27, Tijl Coosemans wrote:> On 11-09-2012 16:10,
> >Dimitry Andric wrote:
> >...
> >>>Yes, maths support, specifically precision, is admittedly still one of
> >>>clang's
Doug Barton writes:
> On 09/11/2012 02:52 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
>> So can we do a sweep on the ports tree and mark the 2232 ports with
>> USE_GCC=4.2 until they can actually build with clang?
>
> Unfortunately it isn't that simple. We already have a statistically
> significant number of po
On 2012-Sep-11, 23:29, Doug Barton wrote:
> What we need to do is what I and others have been asking to do for
> years. We need to designate a modern version of gcc (no less than 4.6)
> as the official default ports compiler, and rework whatever is needed to
> support this. Fortunately, that goal i
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 08:21:31AM +0200, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
> On 2012-Sep-11, 23:29, Doug Barton wrote:
> > What we need to do is what I and others have been asking to do for
> > years. We need to designate a modern version of gcc (no less than 4.6)
> > as the official default ports compiler, a
39 matches
Mail list logo
