Re: luit -encoding gbk causes Segmentation fault (core dumped) in 9-stable

2011-09-27 Thread Yue Wu
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:17:54AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 28 September 2011 09:08, Yue Wu wrote: > > Hello list, > > > > As the title said. When on 8-stable, luit -encdoding gbk works fine, > > anyone can figure it out what's wrong? > > > > I'm sure it's not a luit's bug because luit work

Re: luit -encoding gbk causes Segmentation fault (core dumped) in 9-stable

2011-09-27 Thread Adrian Chadd
On 28 September 2011 09:08, Yue Wu wrote: > Hello list, > > As the title said. When on 8-stable, luit -encdoding gbk works fine, > anyone can figure it out what's wrong? > > I'm sure it's not a luit's bug because luit works fine and no any > version updating happened before and after OS's upgradin

luit -encoding gbk causes Segmentation fault (core dumped) in 9-stable

2011-09-27 Thread Yue Wu
Hello list, As the title said. When on 8-stable, luit -encdoding gbk works fine, anyone can figure it out what's wrong? I'm sure it's not a luit's bug because luit works fine and no any version updating happened before and after OS's upgrading, I just recompiled luit from ports after upgrade from

Re: NFSD hang

2011-09-27 Thread Rick Macklem
Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 05:41:57AM -0700, Kirill Yelizarov wrote: > > From: Jeremy Chadwick > > To: Kirill Yelizarov > > Cc: rmack...@uoguelph.ca; freebsd-stable@freebsd.org > > Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 3:59 PM > > Subject: Re: NFSD hang > > > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2

Re: non-responding processes after truss(1)ing

2011-09-27 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 09:28:56AM -0400, Mark Saad wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Nikos Vassiliadis wrote: > > On 9/27/2011 1:10 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > >> > >> kill -9 your truss processes; the underlying processes which you are > >> truss'ing will probably resume. > >> > >> My e

Re: non-responding processes after truss(1)ing

2011-09-27 Thread Mark Saad
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Nikos Vassiliadis wrote: > On 9/27/2011 1:10 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: >> >> kill -9 your truss processes; the underlying processes which you are >> truss'ing will probably resume. >> >> My experience for years has been that truss on FreeBSD is extremely >> buggy

Re: NFSD hang

2011-09-27 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 05:41:57AM -0700, Kirill Yelizarov wrote: > From: Jeremy Chadwick > To: Kirill Yelizarov > Cc: rmack...@uoguelph.ca; freebsd-stable@freebsd.org > Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 3:59 PM > Subject: Re: NFSD hang > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 04:04:10AM -0700, Kirill Yeliza

Re: NFSD hang

2011-09-27 Thread Kirill Yelizarov
From: Jeremy Chadwick To: Kirill Yelizarov Cc: rmack...@uoguelph.ca; freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 3:59 PM Subject: Re: NFSD hang On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 04:04:10AM -0700, Kirill Yelizarov wrote: > I found a had sync enabled on

Re: NFSD hang

2011-09-27 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 04:04:10AM -0700, Kirill Yelizarov wrote: > I found a had sync enabled on my server so I set? zfs?set?sync=disabled data > and will look for failures. Are there any other setting for nfs over zfs i > can check or set? > > > > # uname -a >

Re: [Solved] FreeBSD 9-Beta3 on X300 2 problems

2011-09-27 Thread crsnet.pl
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 08:21:23 +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: Hi, Please try to do this without wlan loaded at all (not just down, but build your wifi support as a module.) Then try without X, see whether it's related to that or not. (And you haven't told us what your hardware is.) Gavin Atkinson sen

Re: NFSD hang

2011-09-27 Thread Kirill Yelizarov
I found a had sync enabled on my server so I set  zfs set sync=disabled data and will look for failures. Are there any other setting for nfs over zfs i can check or set? # uname -a FreeBSD brat.faberlic.com 8.2-STABLE FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE #0: Thu Jun  9 11:22:38

Re: non-responding processes after truss(1)ing

2011-09-27 Thread Nikos Vassiliadis
On 9/27/2011 1:10 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: kill -9 your truss processes; the underlying processes which you are truss'ing will probably resume. My experience for years has been that truss on FreeBSD is extremely buggy and cannot be relied upon (case in point). Such is still the case on RELENG

Re: FreeBSD 9-Beta3 on X300 2 problems

2011-09-27 Thread crsnet.pl
Hi, Hello, thanks for reply. Please try to do this without wlan loaded at all (not just down, but build your wifi support as a module.) Then try without X, see whether it's related to that or not. First i make kldunload if_iwn. When i try to suspend from X, Xorg close, i see console and lapto

Re: non-responding processes after truss(1)ing

2011-09-27 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:57:11PM +0300, Nikos Vassiliadis wrote: > My system have two non-responding processes after some truss(1)ing > i did on them. They seem stopped and do not respond to sigcont. > > >%ps > > PID TT STAT TIME COMMAND > > 9768 0- I 0:00.12 truss -p 9739 > > 951

non-responding processes after truss(1)ing

2011-09-27 Thread Nikos Vassiliadis
Hi, My system have two non-responding processes after some truss(1)ing i did on them. They seem stopped and do not respond to sigcont. %ps PID TT STAT TIME COMMAND 9768 0- I 0:00.12 truss -p 9739 9514 1 Is 0:00.29 -csh (csh) 9739 1 TX+2:06.24 sqlite3 ../nikos_ou