https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265154
Michael Tuexen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tue...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #1
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265154
--- Comment #2 from Kristof Provost ---
(In reply to Michael Tuexen from comment #1)
Correct, yes. Here's a pcap with a few attempts, some successful, some failing:
http://people.freebsd.org/~kp/265154.pcap
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265154
--- Comment #3 from Michael Tuexen ---
(In reply to Kristof Provost from comment #2)
It is great that we have a reproducer. I added Gleb, since we were discussing
this in review D35730. My fix was wrong as indicated by Gleb, but I think you
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265154
Gleb Smirnoff changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|n...@freebsd.org |gleb...@freebsd.org
S
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=252596
Inoki changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||veyx.s...@gmail.com
--- Comment #3 from In
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=252596
--- Comment #4 from Inoki ---
Created attachment 235278
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=235278&action=edit
Check IP address for broadcast after all branches
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the ass
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=252596
Mike Karels changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kar...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #5 fr
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=252596
--- Comment #6 from Mike Karels ---
Sorry, that's the IP_ONESBCAST option.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=252596
--- Comment #7 from Inoki ---
(In reply to Mike Karels from comment #5)
Yes, I saw the option in the kernel code, there is. But as far as I can see,
none of the applications/frameworks seems to have set the flag explicitly (at
least the pi
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=252596
--- Comment #8 from Mike Karels ---
I have mixed feelings about restoring the checks for INADDR_BROADCAST and
INADDR_ANY. The problem with a send to 255.255.255.255 for a broadcast is that
it doesn't allow any way to select the outgoing in
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=252596
--- Comment #9 from Inoki ---
(In reply to Mike Karels from comment #8)
Thanks very much for the comments !
Yes, a simple UDP broadcast using 255.255.255.255 with default route returns
"Network is unreachable" because of no route.
Our ap
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=252596
--- Comment #10 from Mike Karels ---
(In reply to Inoki from comment #9)
> Yes, a simple UDP broadcast using 255.255.255.255 with default route returns
> "Network is unreachable" because of no route.
Did you mean "no default route"? If
To view an individual PR, use:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id).
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users,
which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering
all versions including experimental development code and ob
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=264257
--- Comment #82 from Dmitriy ---
(In reply to Michael Tuexen from comment #78)
Just sent the link with new core file in e-mail. Kernel was built with "options
TCP_BLACKBOX", without any debug\diagnostic patches.
Thank you!
--
You are rece
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=264257
--- Comment #83 from Michael Tuexen ---
(In reply to Dmitriy from comment #82)
Thank you very much for the core. Let me have a look, I'll report my findings.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You ar
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=264257
--- Comment #84 from Chad Smith ---
(In reply to Richard Scheffenegger from comment #80)
Grabbed the netstat -s output from a recent crash file where the system had
been up for an hour before it crashed again, also posting some additional
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=264257
--- Comment #85 from Richard Scheffenegger ---
Hi Chad,
Thank you very much for your effort. Are you sure about this panic - in the
backtrace, it looks like an issue happend in
#6 0x80d55ec7 at pfil_run_hooks+0x97
#7 0x82
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #1 from f...@cantconnect.ru ---
I think it is the same issue as
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210726 which is marked as
fixed but really still here. And there is proposed patch to fix it in that
thread (see my
To view an individual PR, use:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id).
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users,
which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering
all versions including experimental development code and ob
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
Mike Karels changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kar...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #2 fr
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #3 from Mike Karels ---
Oops, added comment for the wrong bug, sorry.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #4 from Mike Karels ---
(In reply to Mike Karels from comment #3)
No, I was looking at the wrong window. The reply was on the correct bug.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=258133
--- Comment #9 from Daniel Ponte ---
Just an update, this continues to occur on 13.1-STABLE #5
stable/13-n251918-7914eea8e65c: Mon Jul 25 02:29:48 EDT 2022. I can furnish
pcaps on request, but I won't publish them here as they contain semip
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #5 from f...@cantconnect.ru ---
(In reply to Mike Karels from comment #2)
No, wildcard ipv6 bind() shouldn't fail just because ipv4 port for the
specifiec ipv4 address is busy. I'm not sure how this error should be reported
to u
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #6 from Mike Karels ---
(In reply to firk from comment #5)
> No, wildcard ipv6 bind() shouldn't fail just because ipv4 port
> for the specifiec ipv4 address is busy.
There is nothing specific in this bind() call. The address
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #7 from f...@cantconnect.ru ---
Created attachment 235507
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=235507&action=edit
patch to fix connect EADDRINUSE
(In reply to Mike Karels from comment #6)
Ok, I misunderstoo
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #8 from Mike Karels ---
(In reply to firk from comment #7)
Thanks for the new patch. That's simpler (less invasive) than the patch I was
working on, and I can simplify it just a little more. One question: why pass
NULL for cr
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #9 from f...@cantconnect.ru ---
(In reply to Mike Karels from comment #8)
NULL cred is to fix bug 210276. It it not wrong in any case, it means "prevent
reusing busy ports regardless of which creds they are using". Obtained stru
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #10 from f...@cantconnect.ru ---
Made a differential revision for this: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D35967
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #11 from Mike Karels ---
Created attachment 235512
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=235512&action=edit
alternative patch
I'd prefer to keep the two patches separate, in part because I don't know
enough
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265489
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org
--
You are receiv
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265382
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org
--
You are receiv
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265431
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org
Keywords
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265540
Bug ID: 265540
Summary: EADDRNOTAVAIL when leaving IPv6 multicast group and
ipv6_mreq.ipv6mr_interface=0
Product: Base System
Version: CURRENT
Hardware: Any
To view an individual PR, use:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id).
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users,
which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering
all versions including experimental development code and ob
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
Goran Mekić changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||meka@tilda.center
--- Comment #9 fro
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
Zhenlei Huang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zlei.hu...@gmail.com
--- Comment #
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265489
Zhenlei Huang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zlei.hu...@gmail.com
--- Comment #
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
--- Comment #11 from Goran Mekić ---
(In reply to Zhenlei Huang from comment #10)
It is complex and I just started learning about routing implementation in
kernel, so this patch is far from perfect, but let me give some of the answers:
1.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
Alexander V. Chernikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||melif...@freebsd.org
---
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
--- Comment #13 from Goran Mekić ---
(In reply to Alexander V. Chernikov from comment #12)
I'm curious about 1. Does that mean if_addgroup() would be removed altogether
and PF would handle egress internally?
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
--- Comment #14 from Alexander V. Chernikov ---
(In reply to Goran Mekić from comment #13)
Depends on the implementation.
The code in the mentioned repository (
https://github.com/mekanix/freebsd-src/commit/afeff25d15b5d16b6402b36de8d61ee44
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
--- Comment #15 from Goran Mekić ---
(In reply to Alexander V. Chernikov from comment #14)
Continuing on what you wrote, I can see PF implementing something internal,
then IPFW doing similar and we end up with a need for common implementati
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
--- Comment #16 from Alexander V. Chernikov ---
(In reply to Goran Mekić from comment #15)
IIRC ipfw doesn't do anything with the groups. It does have interface tracker,
which is used to maintain efficient lookup for interface-name tables.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
--- Comment #17 from Goran Mekić ---
(In reply to Alexander V. Chernikov from comment #16)
I didn't know you can subscribe from userspace, too. In that case, yes, my
patch is completely wrong. I have to do some research now before I write n
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
Goran Mekić changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #235606|text/x-csrc |text/plain
mime type|
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265382
Mark Johnston changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|New |In Progress
Assignee|n..
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
--- Comment #19 from Alexander V. Chernikov ---
(In reply to Goran Mekić from comment #18)
The rest is the prefix information, in sockaddr form.
Basically, rtm_addrs contains a bitmask of sockaddrs available, and these
remaining bytes are
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #12 from Mike Karels ---
Can someone test my alternative patch (above) with the Go test?
btw, this patch passes with the test program. I ran it with a 3-port range, as
IPv4 and IPv6 listeners allocate different ports with the
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #13 from Dmitri Goutnik ---
(In reply to Mike Karels from comment #12)
I'll test it later today, thanks.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #14 from Dmitri Goutnik ---
Can confirm that the alternative patch fixes the issue. Thanks for looking into
this!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237973
--- Comment #20 from Goran Mekić ---
Initial version: https://github.com/mekanix/egress-monitor
I found in ifconfig
(https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/blob/main/sbin/ifconfig/ifgroup.c#L60)
that group name should not end in a digit, s
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #15 from commit-h...@freebsd.org ---
A commit in branch main references this bug:
URL:
https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=637f317c6d9c0c689677f499fc78ac545b192071
commit 637f317c6d9c0c689677f499fc78ac545b192071
Author:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #16 from Dmitri Goutnik ---
Can this be MFH? Thanks.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
--- Comment #17 from Mike Karels ---
I forgot to add an MFC entry to the commit, but I plan to do it in about a
week.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265064
Mike Karels changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|n...@freebsd.org |kar...@freebsd.org
Stat
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265489
--- Comment #2 from todene...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Zhenlei Huang from comment #1)
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
const char *bind_ip = " "; // My /64 block ip.
const char *HOST = "2a01:4f8:c0c:bd0a::1";
const int P
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265588
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org
--
You are receiv
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265489
--- Comment #3 from todene...@gmail.com ---
https://serverfault.com/questions/1106883/freebsd-bind-non-local-ipv6-address
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265431
Krzysztof Galazka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||krzysztof.gala...@intel.com
--
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263986
Frank Behrens changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fr...@pinky.sax.de
--- Comment #2
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265431
Anthael changed:
What|Removed |Added
Hardware|Any |mips
Version|Unspecified
To view an individual PR, use:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id).
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users,
which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering
all versions including experimental development code and ob
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265431
--- Comment #3 from Anthael ---
Created attachment 235760
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=235760&action=edit
vmware hardware pci passthrought
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the b
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265431
--- Comment #4 from Anthael ---
(In reply to Anthael from comment #3)
the pci passthrought seems refusing to be activated.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265431
--- Comment #5 from Anthael ---
VMWare
ESXi : 7.0.3
Build: 20036589
Virtual Machine
Opnsense running FreeBsd 13
FreeBSD 13.1-RELEASE stable/22.7-n250212-a26d6065f1f SMP amd64
4 NIC 1G binded on driver VMXNEXT3
2 NIC 10G binded on driver V
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263986
Hiroki Sato changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||h...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263986
--- Comment #4 from Frank Behrens ---
(In reply to Hiroki Sato from comment #3)
In my case I have also a router lifetime of 0.
The reason is that the FreeBSD router is only responsible for the ULA prefix
and is the gateway for this and one
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263986
Hiroki Sato changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|New |In Progress
--- Comment #5 from Hiro
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263986
--- Comment #6 from Frank Behrens ---
(In reply to Hiroki Sato from comment #5)
Your are right, (without my patch) the state switches from initial
fdxx::xxx:::/64 if=net3
flags=LO vltime=infinity, pltime=infinity, expire=Never, re
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230807
Kubilay Kocak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wirel...@freebsd.org
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230807
Kubilay Kocak changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugs.freebsd.org/bu
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221354
Kubilay Kocak changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugs.freebsd.org/bu
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230807
--- Comment #14 from Ed Maste ---
OpenBSD's version of the driver has a slightly different approach for the same
thing, but it all involves the code around the comment
/*
* Force maximum payload size to 128
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230807
Kubilay Kocak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|wirel...@freebsd.org|
Assignee|wirel...@freeb
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230807
Bjoern A. Zeeb changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|maintainer-feedback?(bz@Fre |
|eBSD.org)
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263986
--- Comment #7 from Filipe Mendonça ---
(In reply to Hiroki Sato from comment #3)
Like Frank's cenario, my ULA prefix router has a zero Router Lifetime due not
being a default router for the segment. It is only responsible for the ULA
pref
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263986
--- Comment #8 from Filipe Mendonça ---
(In reply to Hiroki Sato from comment #5)
Here's my output of "ndp -p" command:
# ndp -p
2001:::::/64 if=em0
flags=LAO vltime=9, pltime=9, expire=1d0h58m24s, ref=1
advertised b
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=257268
Gordon Bergling changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |Overcome By Events
S
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=255421
ykla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|Open|Closed
Resolution|---
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265718
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org
--
You are receiv
To view an individual PR, use:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id).
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users,
which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering
all versions including experimental development code and ob
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265857
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org
--
You are receiv
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265857
--- Comment #1 from benoitc ---
looking at the source code:
https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/tree/sys/dev/qlnx/qlnxe/qlnx_os.c#n2675
it seems that this snippet initialising the ha record :
```
ifp->if_flags |= IFF_UP;
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265857
--- Comment #2 from benoitc ---
looking at the source code:
https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/tree/sys/dev/qlnx/qlnxe/qlnx_os.c#n2675
it seems that this snippet initialising the ha record :
```
ifp->if_flags |= IFF_UP;
To view an individual PR, use:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id).
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users,
which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering
all versions including experimental development code and ob
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=256820
Koichiro Iwao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #5 fr
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230009
Eugene Grosbein changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |Overcome By Events
S
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263046
step...@thirdvantage.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||step...@thirdvantage.com
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266048
Andrey V. Elsukov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org
--
You are r
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266048
Andrey V. Elsukov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[ixgbe] 82599ES reports |[ixgbe] 82599ES reports
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266048
Eric Joyner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||e...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #1 from
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266054
Piotr Kubaj changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bartosz.sobc...@intel.com
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266054
--- Comment #1 from Hans Petter Selasky ---
Can you go to frame #10 and dump all the variables, including:
print *addr
--HPS
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266054
--- Comment #2 from Hans Petter Selasky ---
Like this:
frame 10
info local
print /x *(struct sockaddr_in6 *)addr
--HPS
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266054
Eric Joyner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||e...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #3 from
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266054
Mike Karels changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kar...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #4 fr
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266054
--- Comment #5 from Eric Joyner ---
(In reply to Mike Karels from comment #4)
That's what I would assume! But I don't know how VIMAGE works, so I am not the
right person to respond to this question.
--
You are receiving this mail because
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266054
Kyle Evans changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kev...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #6 fro
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266054
Hans Petter Selasky changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|New |In Progress
--- Comment #7 f
301 - 400 of 13467 matches
Mail list logo
