Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
LI Xin wrote: I always use options INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE for my kernel :-) Maybe we should add it to DEFAULTS some day... Yes, that would be very useful. But it should also take any includes into account. It was very annoying to discover that INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE gave me only two lines for one of my kernels (those were options SMP and include MYKERNEL). :-( Fortunately I was able to find a copy of that included configuration file elsewhere. But I guess it could be a very bad surprise for somebody else. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd C is quirky, flawed, and an enormous success. -- Dennis M. Ritchie. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
Oliver Fromme wrote: LI Xin wrote: I always use options INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE for my kernel :-) Maybe we should add it to DEFAULTS some day... Yes, that would be very useful. But it should also take any includes into account. It was very annoying to discover that INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE gave me only two lines for one of my kernels (those were options SMP and include MYKERNEL). :-( Fortunately I was able to find a copy of that included configuration file elsewhere. But I guess it could be a very bad surprise for somebody else. Take a look at Wojciech's perforce branch, I find it even more useful than this :-) Cheers, -- Xin LI [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.delphij.net/ FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
LI Xin wrote: Oliver Fromme wrote: LI Xin wrote: I always use options INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE for my kernel :-) Maybe we should add it to DEFAULTS some day... Yes, that would be very useful. But it should also take any includes into account. It was very annoying to discover that INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE gave me only two lines for one of my kernels (those were options SMP and include MYKERNEL). :-( Fortunately I was able to find a copy of that included configuration file elsewhere. But I guess it could be a very bad surprise for somebody else. Take a look at Wojciech's perforce branch, I find it even more useful than this :-) Indeed, seems to be very useful! When will it be MFP4'ed? :-) Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd When your hammer is C++, everything begins to look like a thumb. -- Steve Haflich, in comp.lang.c++ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
I appear to have a machine which will not run RELENG_6_2, though it runs the released code quite happily. Is there a CVS tag I can use to revert the sources back to the way they were on RELEASE? I want to be able to verify that this is and track down what changed! I don't think it should ever be the case that something which runs X.Y-RELEASE will not run RELENG_X_Y should it ? -pcf. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
Pete French wrote: I appear to have a machine which will not run RELENG_6_2, though it runs the released code quite happily. Is there a CVS tag I can use to revert the sources back to the way they were on RELEASE? I want to be able to verify that this is and track down what changed! I don't think it should ever be the case that something which runs X.Y-RELEASE will not run RELENG_X_Y should it ? I think you will want RELENG_6_2_0_RELEASE. What happens with RELENG_6_2, IIRC there was only very limited changes to kernel which should only affect IPv6... Cheers, -- Xin LI [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.delphij.net/ FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:31:54 + Pete French [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I appear to have a machine which will not run RELENG_6_2, though it runs the released code quite happily. Is there a CVS tag I can use to revert the sources back to the way they were on RELEASE? I want to be able to verify that this is and track down what changed! I don't think it should ever be the case that something which runs X.Y-RELEASE will not run RELENG_X_Y should it ? RELENG_6_2_0_RELEASE You can use CVS Web to look them up: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/ - Drop down box, Show only files with tag ... Cheers, Dominic ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
I think you will want RELENG_6_2_0_RELEASE. thanks (and to the others who responded) What happens with RELENG_6_2, IIRC there was only very limited changes to kernel which should only affect IPv6... Indeed! Part of the reason I want to do the revert is to make absolutely sure that it runs the GENERIC kernel from RELEASE properly. The kernel I have running on it is a binary from elsewherre which was built from the 6.2 RELEASE code, but I no longer have the options it was built with (though I can tell it does not contain IPv6). Hence I want to make sure that the problem is with the change to IPv6 and not the existence of IPv6 in general on that machine. Will report back if it turns out to be a problem with RELENG_6_2 cheers, -pete. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
Pete French wrote: I think you will want RELENG_6_2_0_RELEASE. thanks (and to the others who responded) What happens with RELENG_6_2, IIRC there was only very limited changes to kernel which should only affect IPv6... Indeed! Part of the reason I want to do the revert is to make absolutely sure that it runs the GENERIC kernel from RELEASE properly. The kernel I have running on it is a binary from elsewherre which was built from the 6.2 RELEASE code, but I no longer have the options it was built with (though I always use options INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE for my kernel :-) Maybe we should add it to DEFAULTS some day... Cheers, -- Xin LI [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.delphij.net/ FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
I think this is a very good idea, I've been caught at least once not being able to recreate a working kernel due to the loss of the original config file. Steve - Original Message - From: LI Xin [EMAIL PROTECTED] I always use options INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE for my kernel :-) Maybe we should add it to DEFAULTS some day... This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337 or return the E.mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 01:33:44PM -, Steven Hartland wrote: I think this is a very good idea, I've been caught at least once not being able to recreate a working kernel due to the loss of the original config file. Steve - Original Message - From: LI Xin [EMAIL PROTECTED] I always use options INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE for my kernel :-) Maybe we should add it to DEFAULTS some day... I did some work in this area, as several system administrators I've met also seem to have problem with kernel configuration recovery. In my case I came with a method of obtaining a configuration of a running kernel via sysctl (kern.conftxt for now) and via config(8) form the kernel file. Hopefully this work will get more review soon. Thanks, -- Wojciech A. Koszek [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://FreeBSD.czest.pl/dunstan/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
Wojciech A. Koszek wrote: On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 01:33:44PM -, Steven Hartland wrote: I think this is a very good idea, I've been caught at least once not being able to recreate a working kernel due to the loss of the original config file. Steve - Original Message - From: LI Xin [EMAIL PROTECTED] I always use options INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE for my kernel :-) Maybe we should add it to DEFAULTS some day... I did some work in this area, as several system administrators I've met also seem to have problem with kernel configuration recovery. In my case I came with a method of obtaining a configuration of a running kernel via sysctl (kern.conftxt for now) and via config(8) form the kernel file. Hopefully this work will get more review soon. Not sure how useful could it be to expose it via sysctl(8) interface but sounds interesting to me. Have you posted the patch somewhere? Cheers, -- Xin LI [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.delphij.net/ FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
- Original Message - From: Wojciech A. Koszek [EMAIL PROTECTED] I did some work in this area, as several system administrators I've met also seem to have problem with kernel configuration recovery. In my case I came with a method of obtaining a configuration of a running kernel via sysctl (kern.conftxt for now) and via config(8) form the kernel file. Hopefully this work will get more review soon. Does this take into account includes as I just tried INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE and its appears to be useless for configs which make use of include . Steve This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337 or return the E.mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 02:32:48PM -, Steven Hartland wrote: - Original Message - From: Wojciech A. Koszek [EMAIL PROTECTED] I did some work in this area, as several system administrators I've met also seem to have problem with kernel configuration recovery. In my case I came with a method of obtaining a configuration of a running kernel via sysctl (kern.conftxt for now) and via config(8) form the kernel file. Hopefully this work will get more review soon. Does this take into account includes as I just tried INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE and its appears to be useless for configs which make use of include . Yes, it does. You get full configuration file from sysctl(8) or from config -k kernel, and config(8) is modified in a way, that lets you to use this file without additional trimming. -- Wojciech A. Koszek [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://FreeBSD.czest.pl/dunstan/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
- Original Message - From: Wojciech A. Koszek [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yes, it does. You get full configuration file from sysctl(8) or from config -k kernel, and config(8) is modified in a way, that lets you to use this file without additional trimming. Sounds like a very worth while addition, look forward to seeing it. Steve This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337 or return the E.mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
If memory serves me right, Pete French wrote: I appear to have a machine which will not run RELENG_6_2, though it runs the released code quite happily. Is there a CVS tag I can use to revert the sources back to the way they were on RELEASE? I want to be able to verify that this is and track down what changed! I don't think it should ever be the case that something which runs X.Y-RELEASE will not run RELENG_X_Y should it ? According to my records of commits, there were only three post-release commits to RELENG_6_2, and they were all fixes for security advisories or errata notices. They were: FreeBSD-SA-07:02.bind (9 Feb 2007) FreeBSD-EN-07:02.net and FreeBSD-EN-07:03.rc.d_jail (28 Feb 2007) FreeBSD-EN-07:05.freebsd-update (15 Mar 2007) All of these were vetted pretty closely by secteam@ and domain experts (and usually re@ as well). The only one of these that touched the kernel was FreeBSD-EN-07:02.net, which backed out an IPv6-related regression that was introduced late in the 6.2 release cycle. I'm personally pretty skeptical that this could cause a problem, although I'm admittedly a little biased, plus there weren't a lot of details in your email as to what the problem is. To answer your last question: If your machine runs 6.2-RELEASE, then RELENG_6_2 should run on it. Bruce. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
On Mar 19, 2007, at 9:24 AM, LI Xin wrote:
I always use options INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE for my kernel :-) Maybe we
should add it to DEFAULTS some day...
ew yucky
What I do is keep my kernel configs in subversion. I have a common
component which applies to all systems under my control, and an
architecture specific component that applies separately to i386 vs.
amd64 systems. In each, I take advantage of the fact that the config
file can have 'makeoptions' which are basically dumped right into the
generated Makefile.
So in my common file, KCICOMMON, I have this at the top:
makeoptions KCICOMMONREV=$Revision: 366 $
makeoptions KCICOMMON=${KCICOMMONREV:C/[^0-9]//g}
and in the i386 specific file, KCI32, I have this:
ident [EMAIL PROTECTED]
makeoptions KCIREV=$Revision: 358 $
makeoptions KCI=${KCIREV:C/[^0-9]//g}
Since some of my systems are SMP enabled, I have a minor variant
called KCI32SMP also, which is entirely this:
include KCI32
ident [EMAIL PROTECTED]
options SMP
now, my kernel identifies itself with uname:
% uname -i
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
So I know this is a 32-bit system running SMP with the version 358
i386 config and the version 366 common config.
and a trivial lookup in subversion tells me exactly what's in it.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 10:23:53PM +0800, LI Xin wrote: Wojciech A. Koszek wrote: [..] I always use options INCLUDE_CONFIG_FILE for my kernel :-) Maybe we should add it to DEFAULTS some day... I did some work in this area, as several system administrators I've met also seem to have problem with kernel configuration recovery. In my case I came with a method of obtaining a configuration of a running kernel via sysctl (kern.conftxt for now) and via config(8) form the kernel file. Hopefully this work will get more review soon. Not sure how useful could it be to expose it via sysctl(8) interface but sounds interesting to me. Have you posted the patch somewhere? Well, being able to ask about output of: sysctl -a | egrep '(LOCK_PROFILING|WITNESS)' Or any other important options, whose impact isn't directly noticeable is useful, at least for me; even without mentioning, how useful would be to have a feature in our build infrastructure, which could warn a user, that the kernel module which is being compiled separately (e.g: from ports/) doesn't have LOCK_PROFILING, while the running kernel has this option included. -- Wojciech A. Koszek [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://FreeBSD.czest.pl/dunstan/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Reverting to 6.2-RELEASE
regression that was introduced late in the 6.2 release cycle. I'm personally pretty skeptical that this could cause a problem, although I'm admittedly a little biased, plus there weren't a lot of details in your email as to what the problem is. Well, you are right - it wont run a stock -RELEASE kerenle either (with or without IPv6) so it looks like the kernel I have running is customised somehow, and I am going to ahve to try and rack down someone who can remember what makes it different from a 6.2-RELEASE. thanks. -pete. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
