Re: error: undefined symbol: main in poudriere jail

On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 7:31 AM blubee blubeeme wrote: > This issue seemed to have come up in the past: > https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2018-March/068870.html > > > Jail name: amd64_cur > Jail version: 12.0-ALPHA7 1200084 > Jail vcs version: r338898 > Jail

Buildowrld tries to use old ld, and fails

Howdy! Since a couple months ago, the world on -CURRENT cannot be built using the normal procedure: time env LD=ld.lld make -j6 buildworld buildkernel Here's the result: [late in buildowrld process] --- all_subdir_stand --- /usr/obj/usr/src/amd64.amd64/tmp/usr/bin/ld:

error: undefined symbol: main in poudriere jail

This issue seemed to have come up in the past: https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2018-March/068870.html Jail name: amd64_cur Jail version: 12.0-ALPHA7 1200084 Jail vcs version: r338898 Jail arch: amd64 Jail method: svn Jail mount:

Re: UEFI layout includes a freebsd-boot?

On September 24, 2018 12:58:40 AM GMT+03:00, Sean Bruno wrote: > > >On 9/23/18 3:57 PM, David P. Discher wrote: >> This is correct for a EFI+BIOS map. If the installer did this for an >EFI >> only map, then that is a bug. >> > >Is it supposed to "Detect" BIOS vs UEFI booting in the installer? >

Re: IPv6 for local_unbound?

I say yes, especially if we wish to support a IPv6 only system at some point in the future … which seemed to be a “think” of the few major IPv6 advocates in the industry. I guess best practice, this should suck in rc.* config files, and use v6 if v6 is set via one of the ipv6_* variables.

Re: UEFI layout includes a freebsd-boot?

I can do some more testing later … but my observation is that a system booted via EFI, the installer will auto select EFI+BIOS. If the systems boots BIOS, it selects BIOS only. It is possible that the boot sequence to the UEFI USB key, and BIOS Hard Disk. I’m not sure you can say or detect

Re: UEFI layout includes a freebsd-boot?

On 9/23/18 3:57 PM, David P. Discher wrote: > This is correct for a EFI+BIOS map. If the installer did this for an EFI > only map, then that is a bug. > Is it supposed to "Detect" BIOS vs UEFI booting in the installer? sean > My 12-Alpha7 install I just did, with BIOS only: > > dpd@amd:~ %

Re: UEFI layout includes a freebsd-boot?

This is correct for a EFI+BIOS map. If the installer did this for an EFI only map, then that is a bug. My 12-Alpha7 install I just did, with BIOS only: dpd@amd:~ % gpart show => 40 234441568 ada0 GPT (112G) 40 1024 1 freebsd-boot (512K) 1064984

IPv6 for local_unbound?

Does it make sense to add an IPv6 localhost (::1) to our setup scripts for local_unbound? unbound is definitely listening on ::1 as well at 127.0.0.1 so things like "host -6" will work if we add it like this perhaps? --- /usr/sbin/local-unbound-setup 2018-09-20 21:47:41.0 -0600 +++

UEFI layout includes a freebsd-boot?

I don't think this layout from the installer is correct, but I could be wrong. Is there any reason to have a freebsd-boot in this layout created by the installer when using UEFI? % gpart show => 40 537234688 ada0 GPT (256G) 40 409600 1 efi (200M) 409640

Re: FreeBSD-12-ALPHA6: Network not starting at boot & can't start Plasma 5

On Sun, Sep 23, 2018, 6:11 AM Graham Perrin wrote: > No problem with Plasma here with > FreeBSD 12.0-ALPHA7 r338892 GENERIC-NODEBUG > built and installed a few hours ago. > > Prior to that I used an alpha from … probably mid-August. No problem with > networking after startup, and no post-startup

Re: FreeBSD-12-ALPHA6: Network not starting at boot & can't start Plasma 5

No problem with Plasma here with FreeBSD 12.0-ALPHA7 r338892 GENERIC-NODEBUG built and installed a few hours ago. Prior to that I used an alpha from … probably mid-August. No problem with networking after startup, and no post-startup problem 'switching' to a static config for em0 that I use at

Re: building head -r338675 with devel/amd64-gcc: /usr/local/x86_64-unknown-freebsd12.0/bin/ld: warning: -z ifunc-noplt ignored

Resending from correct address... > On 22. Sep 2018, at 05:57, Warner Losh wrote: > > Hmmm, what does make -V LINKER_TYPE and make -V LINKER_FEATURES say? > > They look good for me, but the only way you get this error is if they are > wrong. > > Although from your typescript, I see: > > ===>

Re: Suspend, resume, UEFI, CSM, drm-stable-kmod and drm-next-kmod with Radeon HD 7570M

On 23/09/2018 08:01, Graham Perrin wrote: > It seems that working without any drm-next-* and booting without CSM is the > best combination. Sorry, a typo. I meant to say: > It seems that working without any drm-*-kmod and booting without CSM is the > best combination. In other words: better

Re: Suspend, resume, UEFI, CSM, drm-stable-kmod and drm-next-kmod with Radeon HD 7570M

On 22/08/2018 19:27, Johannes Lundberg wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 6:00 PM Graham Perrin > wrote: > > On 22/08/2018 17:50, Pete Wright wrote: > > not sure this will address this specific issue - but have you tested > setting this sysctl knob and seeing