I don't understand this response to FreeBSD-update:
Sure. I can read. I know what the words literally mean. But, 2 months
notice of retirement/EOL for a release when FreeBSD13.1 is not out?
This doesn't make sense. 13.1 is due April 13. Thats 2 and a half
months off, and I've seen nothing to sugge
> Hi,
>
> The freebsd-update metadata contains an EoL date that is (presumably)
> solely for displaying this message. Right now, we don't know an exact
> EoL date of most minor releases until the next minor release schedule
> is published, so a projected EoL date is included and updated once the
>
I upgraded 12.2 to 13.0-p8 and hit a delay with SCSI drive
initialisation, it loops for a timeout over the "Waiting for CAM"
message, then proceeds.
This interferes with the ZFS initialisation and the non-root zpool are
not imported.
I intruded a /usr/local/etc/rc.d script PROCEED: var REQUIRE:
a Dell (not the one with the cam problem I posted about as well today)
refuses to get. beyond BIOS device detection on any bootblocks after
12.1.
I've tried every .iso 12.2 through to FreeBSD-Current snapshots, and
they all display the same problem hanging on the bootable drive detect
phase. I don
Thanks for the cluestick. I don't disagree with anything you said btw.
Here's the dmesg. (attachment, can in-line if thats better)
---<>---
Copyright (c) 1992-2021 The FreeBSD Project.
Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994
The Regents of the University o
Not that this can't be PBCAK, but I have tried not to be the root
cause here. It happened across my upgrade, and the CAM timeout
intruded in the same window.
G
On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 1:31 PM George Michaelson wrote:
>
> Thanks for the cluestick. I don't disagree with anything you
here's the layout from zpool.cache
gronggrong # zdb -C -U /boot/zfs/zpool.cache
tank:
version: 5000
name: 'tank'
state: 0
txg: 5094520
pool_guid: 14778862554646682675
errata: 0
hostid: 2826039973
hostname: 'gronggrong.rand.apnic.net'
com.delphix:has_per_vdev_zap
I feel in a bit of a corner case window regarding UEFI boot configuration,
multiple disks, and zfs. Ignorance is not bliss.
Probably it's UEFI clue more than FreeBSD clue I lack, but the target OS is
a zfs backed FreeBSD.
Which ML is the best place to ask? Here?
G
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2024, 3:47 PM George Michaelson wrote:
>>
>> I feel in a bit of a corner case window regarding UEFI boot configuration,
>> multiple disks, and zfs. Ignorance is not bliss.
>>
>> Probably it's UEFI clue more than FreeBSD clue I
On Sat, 16 Mar 2024, 3:46 pm Warner Losh, wrote:
> When you boot FreeBSD, what does efibootmgr -v say?
>
> Warner
[root@truenas /]# efibootmgr -v
Boot to FW : false
BootCurrent: 000b
Timeout : 1 seconds
BootOrder : 0002, 0005, , 000B, 000C, 000D, 000E
Boot0002* debian
HD(1,GPT,1354d1d3-41a4-
Thanks Warner, efibootmgr -o 000b,... fixed things. So simple!
G
On Sat, 16 Mar 2024, 7:39 pm George Michaelson, wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Mar 2024, 3:46 pm Warner Losh, wrote:
> > When you boot FreeBSD, what does efibootmgr -v say?
> >
> > Warner
>
> [root@truenas /]#
I think the .tgz blobs used by NetBSD are a good example of the biggest
blobbyness you want. rescue and base are the minimal safe set. games X11,
debug and documentation are long standing extras.
I also agree with you Werner, that if you have a SAT capable dependency
solver, the finer you go the m
Isn't this precisely what locked packages are designed to prevent?
Outside of an upgrade tool, I would think locking "base" packages was ..
sensible?
-G
>
>
Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 11:31 AM Edward Sanford Sutton, III <
mirror...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/29/25 18:15, George Michaelson wrote:
> > Isn't this precisely what locked packages are designed to prevent?
>
>I thought locking packages was intended to stop any modification
14 matches
Mail list logo
