The code is broken (not thread-safe).
Try moving the locks furthur out, i.e. move
lock_jobs();
LockRes();
before
if (already_here) {
and move
UnlockRes();
unlock_jobs();
after
already_here = false;
__Martin
> On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 11:55:43 +1000, Alexander Wigen said:
On 2012-06-09 03:17, Kern Sibbald wrote:
> Interesting.
>
> Unfortunately, we cannot use changes to configure because it is
> "compiled"
> from autoconf/configure.in by the autoconf tools.
Understood.
But
> > I just checked the ./configure of the latest code that I built last
> week
> on 8.2 a
Hello,
In looking at how to back out a bad community patch that I
put into Bacula 5.2.8, I decided to reset the repo and to prior
to that patch, because for me it was by far the simplest thing to
do.
The consequence is that for any of you who checked out or
updated the database after 5.2.8 was re
On 06/11/2012 05:01 PM, Dan Langille wrote:
> On 2012-06-11 08:11, Dan Langille wrote:
>> On 2012-06-09 03:17, Kern Sibbald wrote:
>>> Interesting.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, we cannot use changes to configure because it is
>>> "compiled"
>>> from autoconf/configure.in by the autoconf tools.
>>
>> Und
On 2012-06-11 08:11, Dan Langille wrote:
> On 2012-06-09 03:17, Kern Sibbald wrote:
>> Interesting.
>>
>> Unfortunately, we cannot use changes to configure because it is
>> "compiled"
>> from autoconf/configure.in by the autoconf tools.
>
> Understood.
>
> But
>
Sorry, I forgot to finish that.
W
Looks like this problem:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-autoconf/2010-08/msg00071.html
caused by libtool defining ECHO, which clashes with Bacula's definition.
I see that there was a similar problem with RM (renamed to REMOVE), but the
simplest fix is probably to delete the ECHO variable
On 06/11/2012 01:49 PM, Martin Simmons wrote:
> Looks like this problem:
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-autoconf/2010-08/msg00071.html
>
> caused by libtool defining ECHO, which clashes with Bacula's definition.
>
> I see that there was a similar problem with RM (renamed to REMOVE), but
Hello,
As some of you will know, we recently released version 5.2.7 followed
a week later by 5.2.8, and now a day later by 5.2.9. Both 5.2.7 and
5.2.8 had some minor glitches, mostly involving Sparc and platforms
other than Linux. I believe they are all resolved now.
So, we have released Bacula
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:01:30 -0400, Dan Langille said:
>
> What FreeBSD system are you working with? I'm asking in case there is
> something in your system
> which is doing something different.
FWIW, GNU make seems to silently ignore the malformed line and I always use
that to compile Bac
On 06/11/2012 09:27 PM, Martin Simmons wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:01:30 -0400, Dan Langille said:
>> What FreeBSD system are you working with? I'm asking in case there is
>> something in your system
>> which is doing something different.
> FWIW, GNU make seems to silently ignore the malf
Hi Martin,
I have confirmed your suggestion works. The patch tested is attached.
Will this fix be accepted into the public release, if not what is the
way forward?
Cheers,
Alex
On 11/06/12 21:19, Martin Simmons wrote:
The code is broken (not thread-safe).
Try moving the locks furthur out,
11 matches
Mail list logo
