Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
P.U.Kruppa wrote: Hi, I updated -STABLE yesterday and since my FreeBSD machine is set up as gateway my home network broke down completely. I rebooted into last weeks kernel and everything worked as usual. Has anyone else seen this or have I been unlucky with my download? Did you follow the instructions outlined on how to cvsup your system? Did you forget a step? Do them out of order. There is a reason it's documented the way it is on the FBSD site. Mainly - becasue it works. I'm sure then when you review what you have done - it's going to be something you did wrong. -- Best regards, Chris If a scientist uncovers a publishable fact, it will become central to his theory. His theory, in turn, will become central to all scientific truth. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
P.U.Kruppa wrote: Hi, I updated -STABLE yesterday and since my FreeBSD machine is set up as gateway my home network broke down completely. I rebooted into last weeks kernel and everything worked as usual. Has anyone else seen this or have I been unlucky with my download? See previous messages today for an explanation. Rgds, Per olof ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 06:38:07PM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: Hi, I updated -STABLE yesterday and since my FreeBSD machine is set up as gateway my home network broke down completely. I rebooted into last weeks kernel and everything worked as usual. Has anyone else seen this or have I been unlucky with my download? There was a change to if_ether.c that messed things up, but it's fixed now. You should have either version 1.137.2.4 or 1.137.2.6 of if_ether.c Roland -- R.F.Smith (http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/) Please send e-mail as plain text. public key: http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/pubkey.txt pgpLGJaBUjFiP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Chris wrote: P.U.Kruppa wrote: Hi, I updated -STABLE yesterday and since my FreeBSD machine is set up as gateway my home network broke down completely. I rebooted into last weeks kernel and everything worked as usual. Has anyone else seen this or have I been unlucky with my download? Did you follow the instructions outlined on how to cvsup your system? Did you forget a step? Do them out of order. There is a reason it's documented the way it is on the FBSD site. Mainly - becasue it works. I'm sure then when you review what you have done - it's going to be something you did wrong. So you updated your system yesterday and your LAN is still working correctly? Regards, Uli. -- Best regards, Chris If a scientist uncovers a publishable fact, it will become central to his theory. His theory, in turn, will become central to all scientific truth. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Roland Smith wrote: On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 06:38:07PM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: Hi, I updated -STABLE yesterday and since my FreeBSD machine is set up as gateway my home network broke down completely. I rebooted into last weeks kernel and everything worked as usual. Has anyone else seen this or have I been unlucky with my download? There was a change to if_ether.c that messed things up, but it's fixed now. You should have either version 1.137.2.4 or 1.137.2.6 of if_ether.c Thanks, I'll try a new cvsup. Regards, Uli. Roland -- R.F.Smith (http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/) Please send e-mail as plain text. public key: http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/pubkey.txt * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
P.U.Kruppa wrote: On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Chris wrote: P.U.Kruppa wrote: Hi, I updated -STABLE yesterday and since my FreeBSD machine is set up as gateway my home network broke down completely. I rebooted into last weeks kernel and everything worked as usual. Has anyone else seen this or have I been unlucky with my download? Did you follow the instructions outlined on how to cvsup your system? Did you forget a step? Do them out of order. There is a reason it's documented the way it is on the FBSD site. Mainly - becasue it works. I'm sure then when you review what you have done - it's going to be something you did wrong. So you updated your system yesterday and your LAN is still working correctly? Regards, Uli. Mine works just dandy -- Best regards, Chris When you're not in a hurry, the traffic light will turn green as soon as your vehicle comes to a complete stop. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
Chris wrote: P.U.Kruppa wrote: On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Chris wrote: P.U.Kruppa wrote: Hi, I updated -STABLE yesterday and since my FreeBSD machine is set up as gateway my home network broke down completely. I rebooted into last weeks kernel and everything worked as usual. Has anyone else seen this or have I been unlucky with my download? Did you follow the instructions outlined on how to cvsup your system? Did you forget a step? Do them out of order. There is a reason it's documented the way it is on the FBSD site. Mainly - becasue it works. I'm sure then when you review what you have done - it's going to be something you did wrong. So you updated your system yesterday and your LAN is still working correctly? Regards, Uli. Mine works just dandy My friend posted late last night, on a problem we are seeing, Sub: Problem with FreeBSD 6 -STABLE and Dell PowerEdge 2850 spewing arp requests Pasted here: Hi All, I have a problem with FreeBSD 6 -Stable, i built the machine with -RELEASE and it's been running fine for the last few weeks.. Today i tryed to make the jump to -STABLE by running cvsup on the RELENG_6 branch, running makebuildworld/kernel which built fine without any errors.. upon the first reboot the machine did not come back up.. I went down to the data centre where the machine is COLO'd and saw the machine did boot the new kernel.. it just has no network connectivity.. The Machine is a Dell PowerEdge 2850, Raid 1 volume on the Perc4i controller.. there are 2 Intel 1000BT adaptors.. i poked around making sure there were no errors in the syslog etc.. the machine comes up fine as mentioned... and the only odd thing i found was 1) in the output of ps -aux there was over 100 IRQ's listed.. and 2) the network adapter is puking arp requests flooding the local network.. With no fix in sight i re-installed the source and base binary's from the installer which fixed the problem as the machine was back at -RELEASE.. it worked great.. i thought at first i may have had left over files in /usr/obj but from what i thought that should not affect the kernel build/install.. regardless i followed the handbook and removed the /usr/obj/usr dir and ran cvsup again to get the -STABLE source.. i ran make cleandir and started the process over again.. and once again after the kernel install the machine loses it's networking capabilities and starts spewing Arp requests... Could anyone offer any insight? Sorry about not having a dmesg but i dont have access to the machine at the moment as it's dead :P Thanks Rob. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
Derrick MacPherson wrote: My friend posted late last night, on a problem we are seeing, Sub: Problem with FreeBSD 6 -STABLE and Dell PowerEdge 2850 spewing arp requests Pasted here: Hi All, I have a problem with FreeBSD 6 -Stable, i built the machine with -RELEASE and it's been running fine for the last few weeks.. Today i tryed to make the jump to -STABLE by running cvsup on the RELENG_6 branch, running makebuildworld/kernel which built fine without any errors.. upon the first reboot the machine did not come back up.. I went down to the data centre where the machine is COLO'd and saw the machine did boot the new kernel.. it just has no network connectivity.. The Machine is a Dell PowerEdge 2850, Raid 1 volume on the Perc4i controller.. there are 2 Intel 1000BT adaptors.. i poked around making sure there were no errors in the syslog etc.. the machine comes up fine as mentioned... Yes - I can see running STABLE (or CURRENT for that matter) on a production box makes perfect sence to me. Yes it does. -- Best regards, Chris Exciting plays occur only while you are watching the scoreboard or out buying a hot dog. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
Chris wrote: Derrick MacPherson wrote: My friend posted late last night, on a problem we are seeing, Sub: Problem with FreeBSD 6 -STABLE and Dell PowerEdge 2850 spewing arp requests Pasted here: Hi All, I have a problem with FreeBSD 6 -Stable, i built the machine with -RELEASE and it's been running fine for the last few weeks.. Today i tryed to make the jump to -STABLE by running cvsup on the RELENG_6 branch, running makebuildworld/kernel which built fine without any errors.. upon the first reboot the machine did not come back up.. I went down to the data centre where the machine is COLO'd and saw the machine did boot the new kernel.. it just has no network connectivity.. The Machine is a Dell PowerEdge 2850, Raid 1 volume on the Perc4i controller.. there are 2 Intel 1000BT adaptors.. i poked around making sure there were no errors in the syslog etc.. the machine comes up fine as mentioned... Yes - I can see running STABLE (or CURRENT for that matter) on a production box makes perfect sence to me. Yes it does. Wow, if I could use that sarcasm to fuel my car I'd be happy. I guess we would be the only people to run current or stable on a production machine, and everyone else is using RELEASE? I guess I should have stuck with 4.1x considering all the initial troubles with 5.x, and not go to 6 at all cause heck that can't be near ready considering the obvious ineptitude of freebsd developers, the horrible track record speaks for itself. Or should I run RedHat? ;) Just wanted to contribute to the discussion in a productive manner, and make sure people are aware of issues as well as solve our current issue, but thanks for your input nonetheless. I hope it's sunny over there today, cause it is here. Whoomp. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
Derrick MacPherson wrote: Chris wrote: Derrick MacPherson wrote: My friend posted late last night, on a problem we are seeing, Sub: Problem with FreeBSD 6 -STABLE and Dell PowerEdge 2850 spewing arp requests Pasted here: Hi All, I have a problem with FreeBSD 6 -Stable, i built the machine with -RELEASE and it's been running fine for the last few weeks.. Today i tryed to make the jump to -STABLE by running cvsup on the RELENG_6 branch, running makebuildworld/kernel which built fine without any errors.. upon the first reboot the machine did not come back up.. I went down to the data centre where the machine is COLO'd and saw the machine did boot the new kernel.. it just has no network connectivity.. The Machine is a Dell PowerEdge 2850, Raid 1 volume on the Perc4i controller.. there are 2 Intel 1000BT adaptors.. i poked around making sure there were no errors in the syslog etc.. the machine comes up fine as mentioned... Yes - I can see running STABLE (or CURRENT for that matter) on a production box makes perfect sence to me. Yes it does. Wow, if I could use that sarcasm to fuel my car I'd be happy. I guess we would be the only people to run current or stable on a production machine, and everyone else is using RELEASE? I guess I should have stuck with 4.1x considering all the initial troubles with 5.x, and not go to 6 at all cause heck that can't be near ready considering the obvious ineptitude of freebsd developers, the horrible track record speaks for itself. Or should I run RedHat? ;) Just wanted to contribute to the discussion in a productive manner, and make sure people are aware of issues as well as solve our current issue, but thanks for your input nonetheless. I hope it's sunny over there today, cause it is here. Whoomp. Indeed it is - perhaps a bit more then there. -- Best regards, Chris The value of a program is proportional to the weight of its output. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
Chris wrote: Derrick MacPherson wrote: My friend posted late last night, on a problem we are seeing, Sub: Problem with FreeBSD 6 -STABLE and Dell PowerEdge 2850 spewing arp requests Pasted here: Hi All, I have a problem with FreeBSD 6 -Stable, i built the machine with -RELEASE and it's been running fine for the last few weeks.. Today i tryed to make the jump to -STABLE by running cvsup on the RELENG_6 branch, running makebuildworld/kernel which built fine without any errors.. upon the first reboot the machine did not come back up.. I went down to the data centre where the machine is COLO'd and saw the machine did boot the new kernel.. it just has no network connectivity.. The Machine is a Dell PowerEdge 2850, Raid 1 volume on the Perc4i controller.. there are 2 Intel 1000BT adaptors.. i poked around making sure there were no errors in the syslog etc.. the machine comes up fine as mentioned... Yes - I can see running STABLE (or CURRENT for that matter) on a production box makes perfect sence to me. Yes it does. Who said anything about a production box? just because the machine is sitting in a COLO dont mean it's in production.. Why not offer some valued input instead of smart ass comments? you seem like the type of person most people ignore when they hear you open your mouth, but it's such a nice day i thought i would respond.. Happy Thanks Giving!! And for the rest of you thanks for all the help! Rob smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
Wow I must be missing something here on a very basic, fundamental level. I run FreeBSD-RELEASE on a production box. I have my reservations but it was the only release that supported my RAID controller, so I had no choice (or buy a $300 raid card that was supported). Anyway it works fine so far (knock heavily and repeatedly on huge pieces of wood). I've read the FreeBSD notes regarding the differences between STABLE, CURRENT and RELEASE. So uh, what is supposed to be run on a production box? In plain sight on the FreeBSD site it says Latest production release which is 6.0-RELEASE...are we only supposed to run RELEASE on production systems or are we supposed to run STABLE? Seems to me it's counter-intuitive to call something STABLE and not have it meant for production. My head hurts. matt On 11/26/05, Rob Connon (Info) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris wrote: Derrick MacPherson wrote: My friend posted late last night, on a problem we are seeing, Sub: Problem with FreeBSD 6 -STABLE and Dell PowerEdge 2850 spewing arp requests Pasted here: Hi All, I have a problem with FreeBSD 6 -Stable, i built the machine with -RELEASE and it's been running fine for the last few weeks.. Today i tryed to make the jump to -STABLE by running cvsup on the RELENG_6 branch, running makebuildworld/kernel which built fine without any errors.. upon the first reboot the machine did not come back up.. I went down to the data centre where the machine is COLO'd and saw the machine did boot the new kernel.. it just has no network connectivity.. The Machine is a Dell PowerEdge 2850, Raid 1 volume on the Perc4i controller.. there are 2 Intel 1000BT adaptors.. i poked around making sure there were no errors in the syslog etc.. the machine comes up fine as mentioned... Yes - I can see running STABLE (or CURRENT for that matter) on a production box makes perfect sence to me. Yes it does. Who said anything about a production box? just because the machine is sitting in a COLO dont mean it's in production.. Why not offer some valued input instead of smart ass comments? you seem like the type of person most people ignore when they hear you open your mouth, but it's such a nice day i thought i would respond.. Happy Thanks Giving!! And for the rest of you thanks for all the help! Rob ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
At 02:45 PM 11/26/2005, matt . wrote: Wow I must be missing something here on a very basic, fundamental level. I run FreeBSD-RELEASE on a production box. I have my reservations but it was the only release that supported my RAID controller, so I had no choice (or buy a $300 raid card that was supported). Anyway it works fine so far (knock heavily and repeatedly on huge pieces of wood). I've read the FreeBSD notes regarding the differences between STABLE, CURRENT and RELEASE. So uh, what is supposed to be run on a production box? In plain sight on the FreeBSD site it says Latest production release which is 6.0-RELEASE...are we only supposed to run RELEASE on production systems or are we supposed to run STABLE? Seems to me it's counter-intuitive to call something STABLE and not have it meant for production. My head hurts. matt I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt after trying to figure this out as well.. Yea. The information seems to contradict itself. The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is: #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0 - release branch/security fixes only Results in: 6.0-RELEASE #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6 - 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1 Results in: 6.0-STABLE It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE means only bugfixes and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems not the case? -JD ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
J.D. Bronson wrote: At 02:45 PM 11/26/2005, matt . wrote: Wow I must be missing something here on a very basic, fundamental level. I run FreeBSD-RELEASE on a production box. I have my reservations but it was the only release that supported my RAID controller, so I had no choice (or buy a $300 raid card that was supported). Anyway it works fine so far (knock heavily and repeatedly on huge pieces of wood). I've read the FreeBSD notes regarding the differences between STABLE, CURRENT and RELEASE. So uh, what is supposed to be run on a production box? In plain sight on the FreeBSD site it says Latest production release which is 6.0-RELEASE...are we only supposed to run RELEASE on production systems or are we supposed to run STABLE? Seems to me it's counter-intuitive to call something STABLE and not have it meant for production. My head hurts. matt I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt after trying to figure this out as well.. Yea. The information seems to contradict itself. The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is: #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0 - release branch/security fixes only Results in: 6.0-RELEASE #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6 - 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1 Results in: 6.0-STABLE It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE means only bugfixes and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems not the case? -JD STABLE is Not what you think. Its a work in progress. Towards the next release. Not quite CURRENT, but not RELEASE. RELEASE IS what you would think STABLE might be. The 6_0 tag follows all security patches etc. STABLE follows the work as it's being don within the banch. And what will eventually be the next RELEASE -- Best regards, Chris The first bug to hit a clean windshield lands directly in front of your eyes. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
J.D. Bronson wrote: At 02:45 PM 11/26/2005, matt . wrote: Wow I must be missing something here on a very basic, fundamental level. I run FreeBSD-RELEASE on a production box. I have my reservations but it was the only release that supported my RAID controller, so I had no choice (or buy a $300 raid card that was supported). Anyway it works fine so far (knock heavily and repeatedly on huge pieces of wood). I've read the FreeBSD notes regarding the differences between STABLE, CURRENT and RELEASE. So uh, what is supposed to be run on a production box? In plain sight on the FreeBSD site it says Latest production release which is 6.0-RELEASE...are we only supposed to run RELEASE on production systems or are we supposed to run STABLE? Seems to me it's counter-intuitive to call something STABLE and not have it meant for production. My head hurts. matt I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt after trying to figure this out as well.. Yea. The information seems to contradict itself. The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is: #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0 - release branch/security fixes only Results in: 6.0-RELEASE #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6 - 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1 Results in: 6.0-STABLE It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE means only bugfixes and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems not the case? -JD ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] And here once again, the website tells us: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-stable.html#STABLE Good Lord, it's a wunnerful thing to read. -- Best regards, Chris The first bug to hit a clean windshield lands directly in front of your eyes. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
On Saturday 26 November 2005 18:34, Derrick MacPherson wrote: Wow, if I could use that sarcasm to fuel my car I'd be happy. I guess we would be the only people to run current or stable on a production machine, and everyone else is using RELEASE? I guess I should have stuck with 4.1x considering all the initial troubles with 5.x, and not go to 6 at all cause Those of us who are content to drive the latest model, should be gratefull that there are people who volunteer to be crash-test dummies. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
FreeBSD should really consider changing the name of their branch name STABLE to DEV or PRE-RELEASE, since it clearly states on freebsd.org the STABLE branch is for those wishing to track and contribute to the development process of the next FreeBSD RELEASE. It makes sense to leave RELEASE the way it is, since RELEASE branches are meant exactly for how their namesake states. FreeBSD-CURRENT pretty much self-explains what it's meant for, which is the latest, bleeding edge code, which once tested is added to STABLE...or wait, then maybe CURRENT should be called DEV? ahhh!! :) matt On 11/26/05, J.D. Bronson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt after trying to figure this out as well.. Yea. The information seems to contradict itself. The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is: #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0 - release branch/security fixes only Results in: 6.0-RELEASE #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6 - 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1 Results in: 6.0-STABLE It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE means only bugfixes and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems not the case? -JD ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt after trying to figure this out as well.. Yea. The information seems to contradict itself. The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is: #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0 - release branch/security fixes only Results in: 6.0-RELEASE #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6 - 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1 Results in: 6.0-STABLE It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE means only bugfixes and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems not the case? -JD I agree, i think that was my mistake.. i come from using OpenBSD and *thought* -STABLE meant RELEASE+ security fixes.. Which is MY fault for not paying closer attention to the docs.. oh well i am now informed. -rob smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Roland Smith wrote: On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 06:38:07PM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: Hi, I updated -STABLE yesterday and since my FreeBSD machine is set up as gateway my home network broke down completely. I rebooted into last weeks kernel and everything worked as usual. Has anyone else seen this or have I been unlucky with my download? There was a change to if_ether.c that messed things up, but it's fixed now. You should have either version 1.137.2.4 or 1.137.2.6 of if_ether.c Roland -- R.F.Smith (http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/) Please send e-mail as plain text. public key: http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/pubkey.txt * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
Hey, what are you all doing on my thread? :-) 1) As Roland Smith pointed out (see below) - there was a bug in -STABLE sources, which has been repaired in the meantime. 2) All in all -STABLE is great, this must have been the first major issue I ran into during the last two or three years. Sorry for top posting, Uli. On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Roland Smith wrote: On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 06:38:07PM +0100, P.U.Kruppa wrote: Hi, I updated -STABLE yesterday and since my FreeBSD machine is set up as gateway my home network broke down completely. I rebooted into last weeks kernel and everything worked as usual. Has anyone else seen this or have I been unlucky with my download? There was a change to if_ether.c that messed things up, but it's fixed now. You should have either version 1.137.2.4 or 1.137.2.6 of if_ether.c * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yesterday's -STABLE kernel corrupts LAN
On 2005-11-26 14:52, J.D. Bronson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 02:45 PM 11/26/2005, matt . wrote: Wow I must be missing something here on a very basic, fundamental level. I run FreeBSD-RELEASE on a production box. I have my reservations but it was the only release that supported my RAID controller, so I had no choice (or buy a $300 raid card that was supported). Anyway it works fine so far (knock heavily and repeatedly on huge pieces of wood). I've read the FreeBSD notes regarding the differences between STABLE, CURRENT and RELEASE. So uh, what is supposed to be run on a production box? In plain sight on the FreeBSD site it says Latest production release which is 6.0-RELEASE...are we only supposed to run RELEASE on production systems or are we supposed to run STABLE? Seems to me it's counter-intuitive to call something STABLE and not have it meant for production. My head hurts. I couldnt agree more with this comment. My head hurt after trying to figure this out as well.. Yea. The information seems to contradict itself. The only thing I have been able to 100% figure out is: #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6_0 - release branch/security fixes only Results in: 6.0-RELEASE #*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_6 - 6.0 + changes will eventually be 6.1 Results in: 6.0-STABLE It is perhaps a bit easier in OpenBSD land. -STABLE means only bugfixes and important patches. In FreeBSD - this seems not the case? That's RELENG_6_0 here. We call these the security branches. The -STABLE branch is a more actively maintained branch, out of which the future releases of 6.1-RELEASE, 6.2-RELEASE, ... will be made. A lot of this is explained in ``Choosing the FreeBSD Version That Is Right For You'', at http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/version-guide/ I hope this helps a bit, Giorgos ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
