"Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
> Recent -current, 'make' fails ('make depend' works), I got this for
> _every_ module:
>
> ld -r -o 3dfx.kld tdfx_pci.o
> /usr/libexec/elf/ld: cannot open tdfx_pci.o: No such file or directory
> *** Error code 1
>
> Stop in /usr/src/sys/modules/3dfx.
>
I think this m
On Sun, 18 Feb 2001, Pete Carah wrote:
> This may relate to a commit about noon (PST) today fixing a different
> problem. I'm just waiting it out :-)
Oh. I'll just wait too.
> Welcome to "current" where (especially lately) about half the time things
> don't 'make'... (I'm trying to recompi
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Pierre Y. Dampure wrote:
> "Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
>
> > Recent -current, 'make' fails ('make depend' works), I got this for
> > _every_ module:
> >
> > ld -r -o 3dfx.kld tdfx_pci.o
> > /usr/libexec/elf/ld: cannot open tdfx_pci.o: No such file or directory
> > *** Erro
Greetings everyone:
Will I run into any problems doing a make world from a
12/25/1999 version of -CURRENT to the latest -current?
I noticed on -RELEASE machines when I went from
3.3-R to 4.1-R, I had problems because the loaded
kernel doesn't have the modules and I had to use the
Generic kernel
This gets my vinum config working enough such that I can mount
my pre-devfs configuration, if anyone wants to test/comment please
try this: (you'll need to recompile src/sbin/vinum as well)
Index: vinum.c
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/s
> During the fixing stages of the libc problem, vinum caused panics fairly
> regularly for me (very early on or during fsck).
>
> I'm now seeing panics in ufs write after medium heavy activity (make world,
> no -j) on SMP, no reg dump comes out. Complains about table inconsistent
> (don't reme
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 01:19:13AM -0800, Herman Tan wrote:
> Greetings everyone:
>
> Will I run into any problems doing a make world from a
> 12/25/1999 version of -CURRENT to the latest -current?
> I noticed on -RELEASE machines when I went from
> 3.3-R to 4.1-R, I had problems because the loa
Hi,
the kernel panics while dump(8)ing /usr, even in single user mode.
This is what DDB says:
Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode
fault virtual address = 0x
fault code= supervisor read, page not present
instruction pointer = 0x8:0x
stack pointer =
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Coleman Kane wrote:
> Yeah, this seems to be broken across all modules. I don't know what's going on,
> but it seems like it never bothers to make the *.o targets. The reason mine
> pops up with the error is that, alphabetically, it is first on the list. If you
> remove it f
So, do you need me to do anything or just wait until it gets worked out?
Bruce Evans had the audacity to say:
>
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Coleman Kane wrote:
>
> > Yeah, this seems to be broken across all modules. I don't know what's going on,
> > but it seems like it never bothers to make the *.o
I've got the same problem on my laptop.
Quoting Coleman Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> So, do you need me to do anything or just wait until it gets worked out?
>
> Bruce Evans had the audacity to say:
> >
> > On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Coleman Kane wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah, this seems to be broken acro
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Edwin Culp wrote:
Reverting /usr/src/sys/conf/kmod.mk to rev. 1.90 fixes the problem for
the moment.
harti
EC>I've got the same problem on my laptop.
EC>
EC>
EC>Quoting Coleman Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
EC>
EC>> So, do you need me to do anything or just wait until it gets w
Quoting Harti Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Edwin Culp wrote:
>
> Reverting /usr/src/sys/conf/kmod.mk to rev. 1.90 fixes the problem for
> the moment.
>
> harti
Thanks, I'll do that right now.
ed
-
EnContacto.Net - CafeMan
We all know: -current is bleeding edge, expect it to break at random. Don't run it if
you don't know how to fix it.
-stable is for production, it works all the time.
Do we need a level in between for people who just run current for the fun of it and
for testing.
So after the hardcore has tested
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Leif Neland
> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 8:55 AM
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Do we need a 3. level between stable and cuurent?
>
>
> We all know: -current is bleeding edge, expect it to brea
"oldfart@gtonet" wrote:
> -RELEASE, I thought, is for production. Although, it's true, -STABLE rarely
> has a stop.
Nope, -STABLE is for production, -RELEASE is for installing immediately
prior to upgrading it to -STABLE. X.X-STABLE = X.X-RELEASE + fixes +
carefully selected stuff that has been
I stand corrected...
> -Original Message-
> From: Dermot McNally [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 9:23 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD. ORG
> Subject: Re: Do we need a 3. level between stable and cuurent?
>
>
> "oldfart@gtonet" wrote:
Sources updated yesterday:
===> sbin/mountd
cc -O -pipe -DNFS -DMFS -DCD9660 -DMSDOSFS -c /usr/src/sbin/mountd/mountd.c
/usr/src/sbin/mountd/mountd.c:164: warning: `struct xucred' declared inside parameter
list
/usr/src/sbin/mountd/mountd.c:164: warning: its scope is only this definition or
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Matthew Jacob
>writes:
> : One system got stuck in the current __sF bork... I'm not stuck with:
>
> : Any advice?
>
> Copy a pre Feb 10th libc.so.5 to this box. Alternatively, copy a Feb
> 17 or later one.
It turns out that no matter what I seem to do, I can'
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 17:22:43 +
Dermot McNally <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DM> Nope, -STABLE is for production, -RELEASE is for installing immediately
Indeed, in fact there has been at least one release that was *not*
tagged for -STABLE (3.0).
--
Tell a computer to WIN - you lose!
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Matthew Jacob wrote:
> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Matthew
>Jacob writes:
> > : One system got stuck in the current __sF bork... I'm not stuck with:
> >
> > : Any advice?
> >
> > Copy a pre Feb 10th libc.so.5 to this box. Alternatively, copy a Feb
> > 17 or later one.
* Leif Neland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010219 08:54] wrote:
> We all know: -current is bleeding edge, expect it to break at random. Don't run it
>if you don't know how to fix it.
> -stable is for production, it works all the time.
>
> Do we need a level in between for people who just run current for
looks like the usual drill for alpha, w/o lubricant:
@/alpha/linux/linux_syscall.h:126: warning: `LINUX_SYS_linux_mount' redefined
@/alpha/linux/linux_syscall.h:25: warning: this is the location of the
previous definition
In file included from
/tstsys/modules/linux/../../compat/linux/linux_file.
it u sed to be that one would do 'config -r ' to config a kernel, so
that it removed the old /sys/compile/ directory ... -r was removed,
so is it no longer required to remove the old directory before building
the new kernel, or ... ?
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 I
Matthew Jacob writes:
>
> looks like the usual drill for alpha, w/o lubricant:
>
> @/alpha/linux/linux_syscall.h:126: warning: `LINUX_SYS_linux_mount' redefined
> @/alpha/linux/linux_syscall.h:25: warning: this is the location of the
> previous definition
> In file included from
> /tsts
Since the big shake-up with -current, I find that mozilla and galeon can
no longer function (both up to date), but lynx has no problems. Mozilla
seems stuck resolving hostnames, yet tcpdump shows no traffic and truss
indicates that it is simply looping around a poll(). The biggest
difference betwe
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Wesley Morgan wrote:
> Since the big shake-up with -current, I find that mozilla and galeon can
> no longer function (both up to date), but lynx has no problems. Mozilla
> seems stuck resolving hostnames, yet tcpdump shows no traffic and truss
> indicates that it is simply l
>
> Speaking of which -- I've got 2 disks on this box. ad0 is -stable and
> da0 is -current. I'm building the -current world right now with
> everything mounted under /mnt. When I'm done, is it safe to just
> install the world with 'make installworld DESTDIR=/mnt' ?
Uh... don't know that one
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 05:45:25PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> it u sed to be that one would do 'config -r ' to config a kernel, so
> that it removed the old /sys/compile/ directory ... -r was removed,
> so is it no longer required to remove the old directory before building
> the new ker
> > it u sed to be that one would do 'config -r ' to config a kernel, so
> > that it removed the old /sys/compile/ directory ... -r was removed,
> > so is it no longer required to remove the old directory before building
> > the new kernel, or ... ?
>
> Yes. The dependency stuff all just works, y
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 04:06:23PM -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote:
> > > it u sed to be that one would do 'config -r ' to config a kernel, so
> > > that it removed the old /sys/compile/ directory ... -r was removed,
> > > so is it no longer required to remove the old directory before building
> > > th
> > /usr/src/sys it doesn't always work. I've told Peter, but I think he thinks
> > this is a real edge case.
>
> Well, there's always rm -rf CONFIGDIR
So I have concluded. Forward into the past!
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of
Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Modified files:
>share/mk sys.mk
> Log:
> Remove bogus setting of MACHINE_CPU here. There is no need for it.
But there MUST be at least one setting for
MACHINE_CPU for 'make buildworld' to succeed before new 'make'
with t
Hi
I have experienced two filesystem corruption cases recently. Both
took place in /usr filesystem, the first was file with very big
negative size, other one was in mozilla port work tree where six
files were lost in deep subdirectory and prevented make clean to
clean up. Fsck did usual job and c
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 17:54:53 +0100, "Leif Neland" wrote:
> Do we need a level in between for people who just run current for the
> fun of it and for testing. So after the hardcore has tested it in
> -current, they commit it to all the monkeys trying to break it, and we
> then try it on n^m' co
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 09:19:56AM +0200, Vallo Kallaste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT #0: Mon Feb 12 16:09:09 EET 2001
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/compile/Myhakas.SMP
[snip]
Don't be fooled about kernel compile time, the system is built from
sources of February 1'st,
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 10:02:57AM +0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Modified files:
> >share/mk sys.mk
> > Log:
> > Remove bogus setting of MACHINE_CPU here. There is no need for it.
>
> But there MUST be at least on
Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 10:02:57AM +0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > Modified files:
>> >share/mk sys.mk
>> > Log:
>> > Remove bogus setting of MACHINE_CPU here. There is n
At 20 Feb 2001 07:54:22 GMT,
Kris Kennaway wrote:
> No, MACHINE_CPU is optional. If you don't have it set, you get the
> vanilla C code. So if you don't have it set at all, you'll get C code
> in OpenSSL as it's always been, then the next time you are using the
> updated make(1) and it will set it
39 matches
Mail list logo
