At 2:17 PM -0500 3/15/02, Robert Watson wrote:
>My feeling is that at this point, we probably should just use
>Perforce due to limitations in CVS.
This seems fine to me. I am uneasy about perforce in cases
where someone is developing something which is *meant* to be
merged back into the main bra
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Nate Williams wrote:
> Only in very rare cases do we run into a problem where we have to create
> a branch. In that case, the developer responsible for the release
> creates a branch from his checked out tree (there's no law against
> creating a branch from sources that are
On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 04:40:08PM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
> If this is going to be a "static" release (calling it RELENG_5_anything is
> a mistake IMHO) then this isn't a big deal. But if people are expecting
> it to have ongoing secirity fixes etc like we do with RELENG_4_5 etc then
> we have
On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 03:32:00AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> "Bruce A. Mah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Differences of opinion on naming aside...the branch isn't supposed to
> > last long at all. The point is to provide a slightly polished snapshot
> > to the wider developer communi
On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 09:36:30PM -0500, Robert Watson wrote:
> It's worth noting, BTW, that originally the release engineering team
> planned to use Perforce for this to avoid the branch issue entirely,
> minimize impact on the main tree, etc, but decided not to due to the high
> volume of compl
> > "Bruce A. Mah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Differences of opinion on naming aside...the branch isn't supposed to
> > > last long at all. The point is to provide a slightly polished snapshot
> > > to the wider developer community. We can't do the QA/releng work on
> > > HEAD without cal
Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's worth noting, BTW, that originally the release engineering team
> planned to use Perforce for this to avoid the branch issue entirely,
> minimize impact on the main tree, etc, but decided not to due to the high
> volume of complaints on the topic.
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
> I can't imagine why anyone would expect to cvsup this thing at some
> point in the distant future
Rule number one of release engineering... user's will do all kinds
of wacky stuff that you would never expect them to do, and complain
bitterly whe
On 15 Mar 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> "Bruce A. Mah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Differences of opinion on naming aside...the branch isn't supposed to
> > last long at all. The point is to provide a slightly polished snapshot
> > to the wider developer community. We can't do the QA/
"Bruce A. Mah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Differences of opinion on naming aside...the branch isn't supposed to
> last long at all. The point is to provide a slightly polished snapshot
> to the wider developer community. We can't do the QA/releng work on
> HEAD without calling for a code free
[Trimming Cc list a little bit]
If memory serves me right, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Actually, with my CVS hat on, I have a *huge* problem with this.
In the future, if you see such huge problems come up, a little more
advance notice might be nice. :-(
> We have a large number of "temporary" repo co
Murray Stokely wrote:
> On March 15, a RELENG_5_0_DP1 branch will be created in CVS for
> final release polishing. This will allow us to provide translated
> release notes, sync up sysinstall and the package set, bump version
> numbers, and tweak default diagnostic settings without further
> i
On 08-Mar-02 Wilko Bulte wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 01:35:47PM -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote:
>>
>> And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes freeze up.
>
> Yes. Or panic. See my posts earlier this week. I managed to get
> 2 buildworlds without accidents, but all make release attem
I'm able to compile kdelibs now, no problem as well as QT, but when I run
configure on kdebase it locks my system up. I can switch terminals but
that's it. It locks up on configure when detecting QT(I believe line 5612).
The first time it did this I decided that was because I need to rebuild QT,
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Chris Hedley wrote:
... about a crash ...
Just in case anyone needs to know, I had another couple of panics today
when trying to newfs_msdos /dev/fd0, seems something in readdisklabel
isn't too happy.
Chris.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe f
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Matthew Jacob wrote:
>
> And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes freeze up.
I managed to panic my 4-cpu 4100 yesterday with a 'make -j8 buildworld'
I'm going to look at that today.
--
Doug Rabson Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >I don't know if its related to this patch, but I get this
> >when I buildworld now
>
> I just did a complete buildworld + installworld with no
> trouble, and I then added the above patch and did another
> complete buildworld + installworld. I had no problems with
> either build.
>
> Applying t
At 6:32 PM -0600 3/8/02, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
> > Try compiling KDE after installing a world with the
> > following patch applied:
> > http://people.FreeBSD.org/~mike/patches/endian-ng3.diff
>>
> > I plan on committing this on Sunday.
>
>I don't know if its related to this patch, but I
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 02:17:24AM -0800, Murray Stokely wrote:
> To this end, we would like to request that commits for the next 7
> days to HEAD be made with special care. -CURRENT is in pretty good
> shape right now, so we're not requiring approval for all commits.
Some of the 5.x package
> Maybe not. I think missing prototypes might be fatal in C++. If this
> is the case, my new endian patch will fix this. Try compiling KDE
> after installing a world with the following patch applied:
> http://people.FreeBSD.org/~mike/patches/endian-ng3.diff
>
> I plan on committing this on Sun
Apparently, On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 04:12:47PM -0800,
Terry Lambert said words to the effect of;
> Jake Burkholder wrote:
> > > Will this release include some kind of bootable-install support
> > > for any new hardware platforms, such as sparc64? (this snapshot
> > > is meant to be avail
Jake Burkholder wrote:
> > Will this release include some kind of bootable-install support
> > for any new hardware platforms, such as sparc64? (this snapshot
> > is meant to be available as some kind of CD-package, right?)
>
> Yes, absolutely.
Wow.
This is really impressive.
I thought it was
Mike Barcroft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Maybe not. I think missing prototypes might be fatal in C++.
Yes.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Yes, Peter also suggested this.
Alas, at some point over the last couple of days, something also broke so that
polled mailbox commands for ISP are now broken. Dunno why. *shrug*
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>
> Matthew Jacob writes:
> >
> > And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Un
Apparently, On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 05:33:28PM -0500,
Garance A Drosihn said words to the effect of;
> >On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Murray Stokely wrote:
> > >As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed
> > > to releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT
> >
Matthew Jacob writes:
>
> And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes freeze up.
>
I suggest reverting rev 1.61 of alpha/alpha/interrupt.c (eg, disable
interrupt thread preemption). I'm on the west coast right now, away
from my alphas, but I had several buildworlds complete last we
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> > >On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Murray Stokely wrote:
> > > >As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed
> > > > to releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT
> > > > on or around April 1, 2002.
>
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> >On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Murray Stokely wrote:
> > >As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed
> > > to releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT
> > > on or around April 1, 2002.
>
> Will this release include some kind of bootable-i
David W. Chapman Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Hmm. This should be non-fatal in any event, but which header does it
> > include to get it's htons() and htonl() prototypes? ,
> > , or ?
> >
> > > Yes. Recent changes to netinet/in.h have made it require the inclusion
> > > of arpa/inet.h. As
>On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Murray Stokely wrote:
> >As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed
> > to releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT
> > on or around April 1, 2002.
Will this release include some kind of bootable-install support
for any new hardware p
Sorry- couldn't see your posts. Majordomo bounced my resubscribe request to
the list owner who seems to not to have gotten it.
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Wilko Bulte wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 01:35:47PM -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote:
> >
> > And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes fre
> Hmm. This should be non-fatal in any event, but which header does it
> include to get it's htons() and htonl() prototypes? ,
> , or ?
>
> > Yes. Recent changes to netinet/in.h have made it require the inclusion
> > of arpa/inet.h. As well, arpa/inet.h must include netinet/in.h. IOW,
> > each
>
[ Could we CC a few more lists? I'm not sure everyone that uses
FreeBSD has read this yet. :) ]
David W. Chapman Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Its not related to libpng, I believe that has been fixed, but I
> cannot tell for sure because kde cannot be compiled under -current.
> I'm not th
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 01:35:47PM -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote:
>
> And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes freeze up.
Yes. Or panic. See my posts earlier this week. I managed to get
2 buildworlds without accidents, but all make release attempts either
paniced or froze.
--
| / o /
Joel Wilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 08:59:53AM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
> > >As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
> > > releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
> > > around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a
And FWIW, alpha kernels on some Uniprocessor boxes freeze up.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Murray Stokely wrote:
>As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
> releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
> around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of major components are still
> in progress, but a great deal of work has alrea
At 4:57 AM +1100 3/9/02, Bruce Evans wrote:
>I'm surprised that everyone hasn't complained about world breakage
>from this. It has been broken for almost 2 weeks now. Everything
>that goes near ntohl and has WARNS >= 2 fails to compile. Without
>WARNS, the bug is reported as above, but a bogus
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 05:28:24AM -0500, Jeff Roberson wrote:
> Should I postpone my allocator commit then?
Hi Jeff,
Yes, I would prefer to wait a week on this. After we've created
the RELENG_5_0_DP1 branch, you may commit the new allocator code to
-CURRENT. That will give us plenty of tim
> I'm surprised that everyone hasn't complained about world breakage
> from this. It has been broken for almost 2 weeks now. Everything
> that goes near ntohl and has WARNS >= 2 fails to compile. Without
> WARNS, the bug is reported as above, but a bogus version of __hton*
> is found in the lib
At 10:17 AM -0600 3/8/02, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
>Yes. Recent changes to netinet/in.h have made it require the
>inclusion of arpa/inet.h. As well, arpa/inet.h must include
>netinet/in.h. IOW, each of these files must #include the
>other in order to work correctly.
>
>As you might guess, this
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
> > Hmm. My impression was that the libpng stuff had been fixed, could you
> > confirm that KDE still doesn't build on 5.0-CURRENT?
>
> Its not related to libpng, I believe that has been fixed, but I
> cannot tell for sure because kde cannot be com
There seem to be two distinct problems. The header one seems to have
resolution,I got around it by the nested include. The second one may
be OBJPRELINK, but does seem to be nailed down yet. Martin Blapp ran into
what might be related problems in the OpenOffice port. I've only seen it
on g++ re
Sounds to me like there are fixes in the pipeline from Mike and Thomas.
Hopefully they'll get that committed in the next day or two so that KDE
can be happy on -CURRENT before the snapshot.
Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project
[EMAIL PROTECTED] NAI Labs, Safepo
Does this include getting someone to fix picobsd for -CURRENT?
Is this important for the snapshots?
Later,
George
*** Making static libraries
cd /home/gnn/FreeBSD/src.latest/lib/csu/i386-elf; make depend; make all;
make
install
rm -f .depend
mkdep -f .depend -a -nostdinc -DSTANDARD_INCLU
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 10:17:16AM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
> > > currently kde doesn't work due to binuntils update. It may work now
> > > after the most recent binutils update, but we have to recompile kde to
> > > see that I believe, andkdelibs cannot be compiled which builds
> > > k
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 11:20:35AM -0500, Will Andrews wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 10:17:16AM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
> > > > currently kde doesn't work due to binuntils update. It may work now
> > > > after the most recent binutils update, but we have to recompile kde to
> > > >
> > currently kde doesn't work due to binuntils update. It may work now
> > after the most recent binutils update, but we have to recompile kde
> > to see that I believe, andkdelibs cannot be compiled
> > which builds kde-config which the rest of the kde meta-ports try to
> > run.
> >
> > I t
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 10:17:16AM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
> > > currently kde doesn't work due to binuntils update. It may work now
> > > after the most recent binutils update, but we have to recompile kde to
> > > see that I believe, andkdelibs cannot be compiled which builds
> > > k
> > currently kde doesn't work due to binuntils update. It may work now
> > after the most recent binutils update, but we have to recompile kde to
> > see that I believe, andkdelibs cannot be compiled which builds
> > kde-config which the rest of the kde meta-ports try to run.
> >
> > I think t
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 08:59:53AM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
> >As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
> > releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
> > around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of major components are still
> > in progress
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
> >As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
> > releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
> > around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of major components are still
> > in progress, but a great deal o
> >As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
> > releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
> > around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of major components are still
> > in progress, but a great deal of work has already been accomplished,
> > and coul
>As discussed at BSDCon, the release engineers are committed to
> releasing a relatively stable snapshot of FreeBSD -CURRENT on or
> around April 1, 2002. Obviously, a lot of major components are still
> in progress, but a great deal of work has already been accomplished,
> and could benefit
> > To this end, we would like to request that commits for the next 7
> > days to HEAD be made with special care. -CURRENT is in pretty good
> > shape right now, so we're not requiring approval for all commits.
>
> I have a Perl-5.6.1 upgrade. Is that too risky? Apart from the perl
> stuff its
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 11:16:53 +, Mark Murray wrote:
> > To this end, we would like to request that commits for the next 7
> > days to HEAD be made with special care. -CURRENT is in pretty good
> > shape right now, so we're not requiring approval for all commits.
>
> I have a Perl-5.6.1
> To this end, we would like to request that commits for the next 7
> days to HEAD be made with special care. -CURRENT is in pretty good
> shape right now, so we're not requiring approval for all commits.
I have a Perl-5.6.1 upgrade. Is that too risky? Apart from the perl
stuff itself, there a
Should I postpone my allocator commit then?
Thanks,
Jeff
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
58 matches
Mail list logo
