Re: cvs(1) assertion failure

2002-12-13 Thread Peter Wemm
Juli Mallett wrote: Has anyone else seen something like this with CVS? %%%=20 (jmallett@luna:~/Work/Mono)59% mcvs rlog mono mono-cvs-log; mcvs rlog mcs= mcs-cvs-log cvs rlog: Logging mono cvs [rlog aborted]: received abort signal cvs: lock.c:177: lock_name: Assertion `(__extension__

Re: More missing perl dependencies

2002-12-13 Thread Alexander Leidinger
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:25:42 -0800 Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://bento.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-5-latest/modlogan-0.8.1.log In the case of modlogan it may be a bug in the configure script (I haven't looked at it). I'm not aware of a runtime dependency, so a quick fix

Re: OHCI patch - please test [was Re: USB issues with Apollo KT133A mobo]

2002-12-13 Thread Bernd Walter
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 07:27:07PM -0500, Brian F. Feldman wrote: Josef Karthauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, If you're an ohci user can you please test this patch out for inclusion in 5.0. I need to know that it doesn't break anything - the reports are that it fixes broken ohci

New AWK bug with collating

2002-12-13 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
Since both operands are unsigned, result can't be negative, but supposed to be. Here is the fix: --- b.c.bak Fri Dec 13 14:54:12 2002 +++ b.c Fri Dec 13 15:20:15 2002 @@ -292,7 +292,7 @@ s[0][0] = a; s[1][0] = b; if ((r = strcoll(s[0], s[1])) == 0) - r =

Re: SCM Microsystems Inc. eUSB SmartMedia Adapter

2002-12-13 Thread Stijn Hoop
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 07:38:11PM +0100, Bernd Walter wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 07:03:36PM +0100, Stijn Hoop wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 06:12:21PM +0100, Bernd Walter wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 08:58:12AM +0100, Stijn Hoop wrote: On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 10:13:49PM -0500,

Re: New AWK bug with collating

2002-12-13 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 03:26:54PM +0300, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: Since both operands are unsigned, result can't be negative, but supposed to be. Here is the fix: --- b.c.bak Fri Dec 13 14:54:12 2002 +++ b.c Fri Dec 13 15:20:15 2002 @@ -292,7 +292,7 @@ s[0][0] = a;

Re: New AWK bug with collating

2002-12-13 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 14:32:40 +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: Pardon my ignorance here, but the following fragment returns -1, doesn't it? #include stdio.h void main(void) { int i; i = (unsigned char)1 - (unsigned char)2; printf(%d\n, i); } It very depends on

Re: New AWK bug with collating

2002-12-13 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 04:41:06PM +0300, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 14:32:40 +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: Pardon my ignorance here, but the following fragment returns -1, doesn't it? #include stdio.h void main(void) { int i; i =

Re: New AWK bug with collating

2002-12-13 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 17:09:42 +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: : : * Integer types `unsigned short' and `unsigned char' promote to : `unsigned int'. With -traditional, the code I quoted still produces -1. Probably because of machine-specific overflow handling or printf

Re: Another UMA panic under load

2002-12-13 Thread Terry Lambert
Andrew Gallatin wrote: Ugh. Since it may call kmem_malloc(), UMA must hold Giant. This is the same problem the mbuf system has, and its what's keeping network device drivers under Giant in 5.0. Both subsytems should probably have GIANT_REQUIRED at all entry points so as to catch locking

Re: Posix Semaphores in -CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Terry Lambert
Joe Kelsey wrote: I have been looking at the implementation of POSIX semaphores in -CURRENT. I noticed that there are several missing pieces, specifically the man pages and the removal of uthread_sem.c from libc_r. I suppose the man pages are not critical, but it seems silly to keep

Re: More missing perl dependencies

2002-12-13 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 10:24:42AM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:25:42 -0800 Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://bento.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-5-latest/modlogan-0.8.1.log In the case of modlogan it may be a bug in the configure script (I

Re: recent openssh problem

2002-12-13 Thread Terry Lambert
Daniel O'Connor wrote: On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 15:53, CHOI Junho wrote: % ssh -2 -N -f -L 9595:remote-host:25 remote-host bind: Can't assign requested address I usually use it to forward SMTP to remote host. Is there any change to system or openssh upgrade? Before upgrading, my

Re: Posix Semaphores in -CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Joe Kelsey
Terry Lambert wrote: Joe Kelsey wrote: I have been looking at the implementation of POSIX semaphores in -CURRENT. I noticed that there are several missing pieces, specifically the man pages and the removal of uthread_sem.c from libc_r. I suppose the man pages are not critical, but it seems

Re: Posix Semaphores in -CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Garrett Wollman
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:41:16 -0800, Joe Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: So, is there some mechanism I am missing? Is there a layer between the application calling sem_open and the kernel receiving the parameters that strips it down to the last component? If there is a higher level

Re: acquiring duplicate lock of same type: pcm channel

2002-12-13 Thread cameron grant
--On 01 December 2002 10:26 +0100 Marc Recht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I'm seeing this lately: acquiring duplicate lock of same type: pcm channel 1st pcm0:record:0 @ /usr/src/sys/dev/sound/pcm/sound.c:191 2nd pcm0:play:0 @ /usr/src/sys/dev/sound/pcm/sound.c:191 please test the patch

Re: Posix Semaphores in -CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Joe Kelsey
Garrett Wollman wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:41:16 -0800, Joe Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: So, is there some mechanism I am missing? Is there a layer between the application calling sem_open and the kernel receiving the parameters that strips it down to the last component? If there is a

Re: Posix Semaphores in -CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Craig Rodrigues
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 08:41:16AM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote: portabliity issue as TRU64 (at least) allows arbitrary pathnames as sempahores, probably storing some sort of marker in the directories (I get this only from examining the TRU64 online manual pages at

Re: Posix Semaphores in -CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Terry Lambert
Joe Kelsey wrote: I have been looking at the implementation of POSIX semaphores in -CURRENT. I noticed that there are several missing pieces, specifically the man pages and the removal of uthread_sem.c from libc_r. [ ... ] I am not interested in threading. Named POSIX semaphores are

Re: Posix Semaphores in -CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Mike Barcroft
Joe Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, I realize this, but it seems that from my cursory inspection of uipc_sem.c that the check for embedded '/' characters is unnecessary and much too restrictive according to the posix standard. The standard only talks about whether or not the

Re: Posix Semaphores in -CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Garrett Wollman
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:02:47 -0500, Craig Rodrigues [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: So apart from the leading slash character, nothing is mentioned about embedded slashes in the semaphore name. What's the right behavior for FreeBSD then? The reason why the standard is written that way was to allow

Re: Posix Semaphores in -CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Joe Kelsey
Terry Lambert wrote: Get me the exact file you are concerned about, and I will stare at it with you. I think, though, that if there is a problem, it's just that you are catching things in mid-implementation (POSIX semaphores were supported in the other scope, but not system, until very recently;

Re: Posix Semaphores in -CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Joe Kelsey
Mike Barcroft wrote: Sounds like a bug to me. Could you open a PR? http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/46239 /Joe To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message

Losing the battle with RC1

2002-12-13 Thread Kevin Oberman
For the past few days I have been trying to get RC1 running on my old laptop (IBM ThinkPad 600E). The installation worked pretty well, but the system crashes frequently when acpi is running. I decided to get a dump to look at and added the following to my rc.conf: dumpdev=/dev/ad0s2b

Re: POSIX semaphores in FreeBSD-CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Craig Rodrigues [EMAIL PROTECTED] [021213 09:39] wrote: Alfred, There is a very interesting thread on freebsd-current about some of the POSIX semaphore code that you contributed to -current. You may want to chime in. :)

Re: POSIX semaphores in FreeBSD-CURRENT

2002-12-13 Thread Garrett Wollman
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:05:45 -0800, Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=sem_openapropos=0sektion=0manpath=SunOS+5.7format=html BZZT! Appeal to irrelevant authority. -GAWollman To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe

Re: Losing the battle with RC1

2002-12-13 Thread Nate Lawson
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Kevin Oberman wrote: For the past few days I have been trying to get RC1 running on my old laptop (IBM ThinkPad 600E). The installation worked pretty well, but the system crashes frequently when acpi is running. I decided to get a dump to look at and added the following

Re: Losing the battle with RC1

2002-12-13 Thread Eric J. Chet
Hello I have a Thinkpad T23 and to get current to be stable I had to upgrade the the bios. Might help you also. On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Kevin Oberman wrote: For the past few days I have been trying to get RC1 running on my old laptop (IBM ThinkPad 600E). The installation worked pretty

Re: Losing the battle with RC1

2002-12-13 Thread Kevin Oberman
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:22:10 -0800 (PST) From: Nate Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Kevin Oberman wrote: For the past few days I have been trying to get RC1 running on my old laptop (IBM ThinkPad 600E). The installation worked pretty well, but

Re: Losing the battle with RC1

2002-12-13 Thread Garrett Wollman
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:02:02 -0800, Kevin Oberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Thanks for pointing out the obvious! (Although I am confused by why it wiped the root partition which is BEFORE swap.) Because it starts at the end of the specified partition and works its way backwards. (The hope is to

Re: ioctl(CAMGETPASSTHRU) hung X11/cda process

2002-12-13 Thread Nate Lawson
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Lamont Granquist wrote: (kgdb) frame 2 #2 0xc0140ffc in cam_periph_getccb (periph=0xc41fc080, priority=1) at /usr/src/sys/cam/cam_periph.c:748 748 /usr/src/sys/cam/cam_periph.c: No such file or directory. in /usr/src/sys/cam/cam_periph.c (kgdb) print

Re: Losing the battle with RC1

2002-12-13 Thread Nate Lawson
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Kevin Oberman wrote: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:22:10 -0800 (PST) From: Nate Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ad0s2 needs to be as big as main memory or dumps may overwrite the next partition. Actually, a bit bigger. But that doesn't matter as I made it 160 MB back when

Re: Losing the battle with RC1

2002-12-13 Thread Julian Elischer
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Kevin Oberman wrote: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:22:10 -0800 (PST) From: Nate Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Kevin Oberman wrote: For the past few days I have been trying to get RC1 running on my old laptop (IBM

Re: Losing the battle with RC1

2002-12-13 Thread Julian Elischer
Looks like a bug in Geom.. Apparently it uses signed numbers :-) (also a bug in the kernel becasue the dump should have refused) On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Garrett Wollman wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:02:02 -0800, Kevin Oberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Thanks for pointing out the obvious!

Re: Losing the battle with RC1

2002-12-13 Thread Julian Elischer
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Nate Lawson wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Kevin Oberman wrote: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:22:10 -0800 (PST) From: Nate Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ad0s2 needs to be as big as main memory or dumps may overwrite the next partition. Actually, a bit bigger. But

Re: Losing the battle with RC1

2002-12-13 Thread Nate Lawson
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Dec 13), Julian Elischer said: It's always been there. the question is Who has broken it? I think it has just slowly bitrotted. I opened a PR on this in November. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/45777 This

Re: Major disk problem

2002-12-13 Thread Nate Lawson
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Craig Reyenga wrote: I cvsup'ed today (dec 12, about 5pm est) from DP2, and it went all fine and dandy until I went to boot into it, when it said that /usr had a bad superblock. I then went on to fsck -y it, and it says that _every_ file is an unknown type and goes on to

5.0 showstopper

2002-12-13 Thread Julian Elischer
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Dec 13), Julian Elischer said: It's always been there. the question is Who has broken it? I think this is a 5.0 showstopper. Having 5.0 overwrite your Windows partition would be poor PR. Having a quick look at it, it shouldn't

Re: Major disk problem

2002-12-13 Thread Craig Reyenga
Actually, I then did that, and thats when it _actually_ pooched the disk -Craig - Original Message - From: Nate Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Craig Reyenga [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 15:39 Subject: Re: Major disk problem On Thu, 12 Dec

Re: 5.0 showstopper

2002-12-13 Thread Maxim Sobolev
I've also bumped into this problem, when after upgrading memory I didn't increase swap size, so that after a panic the system overwrote disklabel. Fortunately, my root partition was placed after swap, not before it, so that recreating disklaber revived the system. -Maxim On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at

Re: 5.0 showstopper

2002-12-13 Thread Julian Elischer
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Dec 13), Julian Elischer said: It's always been there. the question is Who has broken it? I think this is a 5.0 showstopper. Having 5.0 overwrite your Windows partition

Re: 5.0 showstopper

2002-12-13 Thread Julian Elischer
I just posted a hack that should stop this from happenning how does it look? (I haven't tested it.). On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Maxim Sobolev wrote: I've also bumped into this problem, when after upgrading memory I didn't increase swap size, so that after a panic the system overwrote disklabel.

Re: Losing the battle with RC1

2002-12-13 Thread Dan Nelson
In the last episode (Dec 13), Julian Elischer said: It's always been there. the question is Who has broken it? I think it has just slowly bitrotted. I opened a PR on this in November. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/45777 -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To

Re: __BSD_VISIBLE and u_int

2002-12-13 Thread Nate Lawson
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, Mike Barcroft wrote: Nate Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's the proper way to get a typedef for u_int? Is there a doc somewhere on what we expect in terms of #defines for 3rd party application authors? sys/types.h will give you a typedef, provided you aren't

Re: __BSD_VISIBLE and u_int

2002-12-13 Thread Marc Recht
Hmm, which of these defines claims posix src? -D_ANSI_SOURCE ? cc -O -c -O -pipe -mcpu=pentiumpro -mcpu=pentiumpro -I./../include [...] u_int is undocumented and unportable, so it probably shouldn't be used. It's only 3 characters shorter than `unsigned' anyway. It's for ports. And this

Windows/DOS boot problem with DP2

2002-12-13 Thread Roman Kurakin
Hi, I am working at home with three OS. Windows 2000, Linux (ASPLinux) and FreeBSD. I use aspldr (some times lilo) as a boot loader. A week ago I installed FreeBSD 5.0 DP2 and when I tried to boot W2K I saw that can't. I tried to reinstall W2K but when I try to boot I see the same problem.

Re: __BSD_VISIBLE and u_int

2002-12-13 Thread Mike Barcroft
Nate Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, Mike Barcroft wrote: Nate Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's the proper way to get a typedef for u_int? Is there a doc somewhere on what we expect in terms of #defines for 3rd party application authors? sys/types.h

Re: __BSD_VISIBLE and u_int

2002-12-13 Thread Mike Barcroft
Mike Barcroft [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Nate Lawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: cc -O -c -O -pipe -mcpu=pentiumpro -mcpu=pentiumpro -I./../include -I./.. -DDIRENT=1 -DDIRENT=1 -DSTDC_HEADERS=1 -DHAVE_UNISTD_H=1 -DHAVE_FCNTL_H=1 -DHAVE_ST_RDEV=1 -DHAVE_TM_ZONE=1 -DHAVE_LONG_FILE_NAMES=1

Re: __BSD_VISIBLE and u_int

2002-12-13 Thread Tim Robbins
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 11:48:23PM +0100, Marc Recht wrote: Hmm, which of these defines claims posix src? -D_ANSI_SOURCE ? cc -O -c -O -pipe -mcpu=pentiumpro -mcpu=pentiumpro -I./../include [...] u_int is undocumented and unportable, so it probably shouldn't be used. It's only 3

Re: 5.0 showstopper

2002-12-13 Thread Peter Wemm
Julian Elischer wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Dec 13), Julian Elischer said: It's always been there. the question is Who has broken it? I think this is a 5.0 showstopper. Having 5.0 overwrite

Re: 5.0 showstopper

2002-12-13 Thread Julian Elischer
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Peter Wemm wrote: Julian Elischer wrote: looking at the code in src/sys/i386/i386/dump_machdep.c, we see: 78 dumplo = di-mediaoffset + di-mediasize - Maxmem * (off_t)PAGE_SIZE; 79 dumplo -= sizeof kdh * 2; 80 i =

Re: 5.0 showstopper

2002-12-13 Thread Julian Elischer
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Peter Wemm wrote: Julian Elischer wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Dec 13), Julian Elischer said: It's always been there. the question is Who has broken it? I think

Re: 5.0 showstopper

2002-12-13 Thread Nate Lawson
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Peter Wemm wrote: Julian Elischer wrote: looking at the code in src/sys/i386/i386/dump_machdep.c, we see: 78 dumplo = di-mediaoffset + di-mediasize - Maxmem * (off_t)PAGE_SIZE; 79 dumplo -=

Re: __BSD_VISIBLE and u_int

2002-12-13 Thread Nate Lawson
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Mike Barcroft wrote: I fixed a port like this recently. _ANSI_SOURCE was actually added by the port, not the application vendor, in that case. Wait a minute, I think this might be the same port. Is it gnu-finger? If so, try the attached patch. Kris was going to

TTL

2002-12-13 Thread Jimi Thompson
This is an issue that we recently ran into at work and I wanted to mention this since 5.0 isn't released yet. I don't know if FreeBSD has addressed this or not but thought it should be mentioned just in case. We've discovered that in many *nix OS's the TCP stack sets the default TTL for

Re: TTL

2002-12-13 Thread Ray Kohler
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 09:14:06PM -0800, Jimi Thompson wrote: This is an issue that we recently ran into at work and I wanted to mention this since 5.0 isn't released yet. I don't know if FreeBSD has addressed this or not but thought it should be mentioned just in case. We've

Re: TTL

2002-12-13 Thread Steve Kargl
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 09:14:06PM -0800, Jimi Thompson wrote: This is an issue that we recently ran into at work and I wanted to mention this since 5.0 isn't released yet. I don't know if FreeBSD has addressed this or not but thought it should be mentioned just in case. We've

ia64 tinderbox failure

2002-12-13 Thread Peter Wemm
-- Rebuilding the temporary build tree -- stage 1: bootstrap tools -- stage 2: cleaning up the object tree

Re: 5.0 showstopper

2002-12-13 Thread Julian Elischer
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Nate Lawson wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Peter Wemm wrote: Julian Elischer wrote: looking at the code in src/sys/i386/i386/dump_machdep.c, we see: 78 dumplo = di-mediaoffset + di-mediasize - Maxmem