TB --- 2012-10-26 05:31:42 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-10-26 05:31:42 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
Since a couple of weeks I occasionally notice that a command accessing
cd0 hangs and once that happens I haven't found a way to get cd0
working again through software without rebooting.
No kernel complaints are logged, but afterwards somewhat related
commands hang as well.
In this case I noticed
On 10/26/2012 02:43 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Friday 26 October 2012 00:40:42 Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Nikolai Lifanov
wrote:
...
HEAD, sorry
No worries. Nothing coming to mind in the svn commits immediately, so
it might be a complex interaction issue.
TB --- 2012-10-26 15:12:31 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-10-26 15:12:31 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
Running make tinderbox locally I see failures that aren't being
reported by the automated tinderbox builds. I'm curious what's
different about the environment. Failures are in the following:
arm ARMADAXP kernel failed, check _.arm.ARMADAXP for details
mips SENTRY5 kernel failed, check _.mips.SEN
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:26 AM, wrote:
> Running make tinderbox locally I see failures that aren't being
> reported by the automated tinderbox builds. I'm curious what's
> different about the environment. Failures are in the following:
>
> arm ARMADAXP kernel failed, check _.arm.ARMADAXP for
On Oct 26, 2012, at 1:08 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:26 AM, wrote:
>> Running make tinderbox locally I see failures that aren't being
>> reported by the automated tinderbox builds. I'm curious what's
>> different about the environment. Failures are in the following:
TB --- 2012-10-26 19:36:07 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-10-26 19:36:07 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
On Oct 26, 2012, at 1:08 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:26 AM, wrote:
>> Running make tinderbox locally I see failures that aren't being
>> reported by the automated tinderbox builds. I'm curious what's
>> different about the environment. Failures are in the following:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> On Oct 26, 2012, at 1:08 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:26 AM, wrote:
>>> Running make tinderbox locally I see failures that aren't being
>>> reported by the automated tinderbox builds. I'm curious what's
>>> dif
TB --- 2012-10-26 22:20:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-10-26 22:20:00 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-10-27 00:42:16 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-10-27 00:42:16 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
12 matches
Mail list logo
