After booting from a 10-alpha2 disk I am seeing "lock order reversal"
messages show up from time to time. Current logs have 35 entries.
The machine normally is running 9.1 from zfs root and I have setup a
separate disk (eSATA case connected through backplane port to onboard
SATA port) that I h
I'm running 9.2-RC4 on a handful of desktop and server machines (both
i386 and amd64). I have seen three panics (all vm_page_unwire) on one
of those systems only (amd64 server) during the past week.
The first two panics were triggered when shutting down the ntpd daemon
(a recent development snaps
> The patch was not intended to address your issue. It was for
> getting correct MAC revision number. So seeing no behavioral change
> is normal.
> The MAC revision number now indicates 0x0010 which means you
> have slightly different variant. I'll let you know if I happen to
> find m
I am getting an odd error on a recent i386 releng9 while trying to build
a nanobsd image.
It dies during installworld in
cd /usr/src/etc/../share/man;
/usr/obj/nanobsd.full//usr/src/make.i386/make makedb
makewhatis /usr/obj/nanobsd.full//_.w/usr/share/man
makewhatis /usr/obj/nanobsd.full//_.w/usr/
One last shot in the dark:
what if you reboot the router in front of the node in question?
Sometimes it was surprised, when managing different mac addresses
on the same adapter.
I might be missing some parts, but did the mobo work before?
Best regards
Zoran
__
Hello everyone,
Here are the final results of my tests:
1. I reinstalled the router with vanilla 9.2-RC4 and performed the same
tests - the results were exactly the same. The problem persisted.
2. Then I applied the patch provided by Oleg and recompiled kernel. This
indeed did *fix* the problem an
grarpamp writes:
> Is this all wiki'd somewhere?
There's plenty of information on the FreeBSD wiki, but you need to read
the "portbuild" article from the documentation set first. But bear in
mind that a lot of work continues to go into this area, so documentation
tends to larg behind reality a b
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 08:09:36AM +, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> I rebuilt the kernel while keeping the existing kernel, installing to
> /boot/kernelre on the USB stick.
>
> Unfortunately all the modules were redundantly rebuilt. Maybe I should have
> had "-D NO_MODULES" instead of "-DNO_MODUL
I rebuilt the kernel while keeping the existing kernel, installing to
/boot/kernelre on the USB stick.
Unfortunately all the modules were redundantly rebuilt. Maybe I should have
had "-D NO_MODULES" instead of "-DNO_MODULES"?
I typed "unload" at the loader prompt, then "boot /boot/kernelre/ker
Le Wed, 25 Sep 2013 11:06:33 +0300,
Konstantin Belousov a écrit :
Hello,
> > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:45:17AM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> > > > I'd like to understand why you think protecting these functions
> > > > w/ the _DETACHED check is correct... In kern_event.c, all
> > > > call
10 matches
Mail list logo
