On 09/18/2012 23:17, matt wrote:
On 09/18/12 23:00, Doug Barton wrote:
On 9/18/2012 10:56 PM, matt wrote:
On 09/18/12 18:01, Doug Barton wrote:
Sometime in the last couple of months an old problem has resurfaced on
HEAD, a sort of squealing/whistling sound in the audio, even without
anything
On 9/18/2012 10:56 PM, matt wrote:
On 09/18/12 18:01, Doug Barton wrote:
Sometime in the last couple of months an old problem has resurfaced on
HEAD, a sort of squealing/whistling sound in the audio, even without
anything playing. The sound is similar to the wind whistling through
something
Sometime in the last couple of months an old problem has resurfaced on
HEAD, a sort of squealing/whistling sound in the audio, even without
anything playing. The sound is similar to the wind whistling through
something.
Before I blindly go off on a bisecting spree, does anyone have a
suggestion
=== tools/build (obj,includes,depend,all,install)
grep: /usr/include/stdio.h: No such file or directory
/usr/obj/frontier/svn/head/tmp/frontier/svn/head/tools/build created for
/frontier/svn/head/tools/build
grep: /usr/include/stdio.h: No such file or directory
cd /frontier/svn/head/tools/build;
On 09/14/2012 23:43, Randy Bush wrote:
ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ISO-IMAGES-arch is a bit empty. i
guess things are moving around. any idea where i can get the latest
tag=.
I and others have brought up this issue repeatedly over the last couple
of years, and the PTB have decided that
On 09/11/2012 02:52 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
So can we do a sweep on the ports tree and mark the 2232 ports with
USE_GCC=4.2 until they can actually build with clang?
Unfortunately it isn't that simple. We already have a statistically
significant number of ports that don't even compile with
On 09/11/2012 11:15 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:27:50AM +0200, Lars Engels wrote:
At the moment the ports maintainers don't give much about if their ports
build with CLANG or not because they're not forced to.
I think this is a mis-representation.
Adding the
On 09/11/2012 05:03 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:10:13PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
However, I think the majority of users can get by just fine using clang,
right now. Doug Barton even confirmed in this thread that 80% of our
ports already work with it!
He stated
On 9/12/2012 12:40 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
Den 12/09/2012 kl. 11.29 skrev Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org:
On 09/11/2012 02:52 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
So can we do a sweep on the ports tree and mark the 2232 ports
with USE_GCC=4.2 until they can actually build with clang
On 9/12/2012 1:49 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
On 12 Sep 2012, at 10:09, Doug Barton wrote:
Also, users who actually are helping with testing clang for ports
continue to report runtime problems, even with things that build fine.
I hope that you are encouraging maintainers of ports that don't
On 09/11/2012 02:27 AM, Lars Engels wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:54:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
As of last week, 4,680 ports out of 23,857 failed to build with clang on
9-amd64. That's almost a 20% failure rate. Until we have better support
for either building ports with clang, or have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
As of last week, 4,680 ports out of 23,857 failed to build with clang on
9-amd64. That's almost a 20% failure rate. Until we have better support
for either building ports with clang, or have better support for the
idea of a ports compiler, this
On 09/01/2012 23:01, Matthew Seaman wrote:
As rebuilding the repo database is something you'ld do routinely anyhow
as part of normal maintenance
Errr ... what? Why would this be true? Doesn't pkg keep the repo
database up to date as it's making changes?
--
I am only one, but I am one. I
On 09/01/2012 12:59, Garrett Cooper wrote:
Again, this is part of the reason why I suggested multiple release
trains. Although it's more painful for bapt@, et all, it's ultimately
what would need to be done in order for pkgng to be packaged with a
release or set of releases.
Garrett,
I
On 08/30/2012 09:16, Dimitry Andric wrote:
[Note that linking GPL-contaminated code into your
kernel proper is, shall we say, ideologically impure ;-) But that is
not the issue here.]
Can you keep this kind of stuff to -chat please? The more we deal with
the technical aspects the better off
4:37:53 pm Doug Barton wrote:
The problem is that we don't really support the idea of things in the
base magically deleting themselves.
As I have said in previous messages, the bootstrapping problem is being
overblown by several orders of magnitude. For newly installed systems
where pkg
On 08/25/2012 02:49, Julien Laffaye wrote:
True. But when you create jails without the installer, you have to
install pkgng by hand.
Just like all the other ports you have to install in a jail.
--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something. And I
On 08/26/2012 11:37, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 11:34:08AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 08/25/2012 02:49, Julien Laffaye wrote:
True. But when you create jails without the installer, you have
to install pkgng by hand.
Just like all the other ports you have to install
On 08/26/2012 05:58, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
The is the longer plan but this with also true with pkg_add -r, and the pkg
bootstrap may it be pkg-bootstrap or /usr/sbin/pkg. We have been discussing
with
Security officers and we are waiting for the plan being written and setup by
them, so
On 08/26/2012 11:58, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 11:39:07AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 08/26/2012 05:58, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
The is the longer plan but this with also true with pkg_add -r, and the pkg
bootstrap may it be pkg-bootstrap or /usr/sbin/pkg. We have
On 08/26/2012 12:08, Ian Lepore wrote:
Would this get better if the bootstrap tool were named pkg and were
installed on a fresh system at /usr/local/sbin, so that it in effect
replaces itself with the real thing, and has no need to leave a
forwarding stub in /usr/sbin ?
Maybe it could
On 08/26/2012 13:02, namor wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 03:28:27PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 8/23/2012 3:19 PM, Steve Wills wrote:
Hi,
It seems to me that renaming the pkg binary in /usr/sbin/pkg to
/usr/sbin/pkg-bootstrap would make sense. From a user standpoint, it is
confusing
On 08/26/2012 13:35, Warren Block wrote:
On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Sun, 2012-08-26 at 20:58 +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 11:39:07AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 08/26/2012 05:58, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
This isn't the security issue I
On 8/23/2012 8:03 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
On 23 August 2012 22:59, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
I tend to agree with Steve here ... we can't be responsible for other
people's poorly written docs.
This isn't about poorly written docs. This is the user expecting a
tool to exist, which
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 8/24/2012 1:15 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
BTW for people who haven't tested and want to share their opinion,
here is how work /usr/sbin/pkg:
it first checks if ${LOCALBASE}/sbin/pkg is there - if yes it
directly execute
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 8/24/2012 5:33 PM, Glen Barber wrote:
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 01:25:15AM +0100, Jonathan Anderson wrote:
On 24 Aug 2012, at 23:38, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
Let me rephrase that more simply ... very few users are ever going to
need
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 8/22/2012 5:27 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 21/08/2012 22:15, Doug Barton wrote:
And in this case, it doesn't matter how awesome the new tools
are, they are a MAJOR paradigm shift for how users interact with
ports, and we are
Unless I've
On 8/23/2012 3:19 PM, Steve Wills wrote:
Hi,
It seems to me that renaming the pkg binary in /usr/sbin/pkg to
/usr/sbin/pkg-bootstrap would make sense. From a user standpoint, it is
confusing that running the command gets different results the second time it
is run vs. the first time. I
On 8/23/2012 7:23 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
On 23 August 2012 22:15, Steve Wills swi...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Aug 23, 2012, at 10:08 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
On 23 August 2012 22:05, Steve Wills swi...@freebsd.org wrote:
Why can't one of those steps be to run pkg-bootstrap?
Because the how-to
On 8/21/2012 6:58 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
I don't think we have ever done a complete replacement of major
infrastructure in one release.
You mean like sysinstall can be used as an installer on 9 that would
do something meaningful with the current
On 8/21/2012 6:34 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
Humm. devd is the more common case, and we explicitly don't use devd to
start
dhclient on boot even when devd is enabled (so out of the box dhcp would
first
be started by rc, but would be restarted by devd).
That sounds reasonable. People who
On 8/21/2012 6:46 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
I would also like to just remove pkg_* tools from RELENG_10 if that fits the
schedule.
Um, no?
Until pkg becomes mandatory (which can't happen for several years) the
pkg_* tools can't be removed altogether.
What _would_ be useful is what should
On 8/21/2012 11:47 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 8/21/2012 6:46 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
I would also like to just remove pkg_* tools from RELENG_10 if that fits the
schedule.
Um, no?
...
What _would_ be useful
On 8/21/2012 12:05 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
1/ if it fits the schedule: get rid of pkg_* tools in current to be
able to have a fully pkgng only 10-RELEASE
I think it would fit better with historic precedents to make pkg
optional (but default on) in 10, and mandatory in 11. As stated
On 8/21/2012 12:42 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:38:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 8/21/2012 12:05 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
1/ if it fits the schedule: get rid of pkg_* tools in current
to be able to have a fully pkgng only 10-RELEASE
I think it would fit
On 8/21/2012 1:08 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
On Aug 21, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 8/21/2012 12:42 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:38:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 8/21/2012 12:05 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
1/ if it fits the schedule: get rid
On 08/15/2012 03:18, Alexander Motin wrote:
On 15.08.2012 03:09, Doug Barton wrote:
On 08/14/2012 12:20 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Would you be willing to compile a kernel with KTR so you can capture
some KTR scheduler dumps?
That way the scheduler peeps can feed this into schedgraph.py
On 08/20/2012 02:59, Alexander Motin wrote:
On 20.08.2012 11:32, Doug Barton wrote:
On 08/15/2012 03:18, Alexander Motin wrote:
On 15.08.2012 03:09, Doug Barton wrote:
On 08/14/2012 12:20 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Would you be willing to compile a kernel with KTR so you can capture
some KTR
On 08/20/2012 06:32, Alexander Motin wrote:
I have no plans to converge them. I've just found problem in ULE, that
was replicated into 4BSD and it would be strange to fix one without
another. But fixing it exposed another old problem specific to 4BSD,
which I fixed reusing logically equivalent
On 08/14/2012 09:18 PM, Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 2012-08-15 02:09, Doug Barton wrote:
On 08/14/2012 12:20 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
...
Maybe things aren't being scheduled correctly and the added latency is
killing performance?
You might also try switching to SCHED_ULE to see if it helps
On 08/14/2012 12:20 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Hi,
Would you be willing to compile a kernel with KTR so you can capture
some KTR scheduler dumps?
That way the scheduler peeps can feed this into schedgraph.py (and you
can too!) to figure out what's going on.
Maybe things aren't being
On 08/04/2012 17:56, Kevin Oberman wrote:
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 08/04/2012 14:26, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 08/04/2012 00:40, O. Hartmann wrote:
No, also in my case. I build
On 08/02/2012 12:18, David Chisnall wrote:
Thank you for your thoughtful reply,
You too ... I let some time go by to see what others had to say. I think
it's disappointing that more people aren't concerned about this issue.
On 2 Aug 2012, at 19:33, Doug Barton wrote:
However, my point
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 08/04/2012 00:40, O. Hartmann wrote:
No, also in my case. I build world and the VBox software with each
kernel - usually.
You can ensure that by putting this in src.conf:
PORTS_MODULES= emulators/virtualbox-ose-kmod
You can place other
On 08/04/2012 14:26, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 08/04/2012 00:40, O. Hartmann wrote:
No, also in my case. I build world and the VBox software with each
kernel - usually.
You can ensure that by putting this in src.conf
On 08/02/2012 09:20, Scott Long wrote:
On Aug 2, 2012, at 12:23 AM, Kevin Oberman kob6...@gmail.com
wrote:
Doug makes some good points.
No, he doesn't.
Yes I do! (So there)
He and Arnould being argumentative and accusatory
where none of that is warranted.
I used to run the
On 08/02/2012 05:54, David Chisnall wrote:
On 2 Aug 2012, at 05:30, Doug Barton wrote:
I used to ask the PTB to provide *some* form of remote
participation for even a fraction of the events at the dev summit.
I don't bother asking anymore because year after year my requests
were met
On 08/02/2012 09:44, Garrett Cooper wrote:
The Watson/Losh connection worked really well in BSDCan 2010 :).
I wasn't going to mention that, since I didn't want to tell tales out of
school. But the fact that remote participation actually was provided for
the right people, even though I was told
On 08/02/2012 10:13, David Chisnall wrote:
On 2 Aug 2012, at 17:46, Doug Barton wrote:
Well that's a start. :) And where was this availability announced?
If I missed it, that's on me. But providing remote access that you
don't tell people about isn't really any better than not providing
BTW, for those who'd like to get a flavor of what the IETF model looks
like, the Vancouver meeting is in process now:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/84/agenda.html
Feel free to join in as a lurker.
--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something.
On 08/02/2012 10:34, Doug Barton wrote:
BTW, for those who'd like to get a flavor of what the IETF model looks
like, the Vancouver meeting is in process now:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/84/agenda.html
Feel free to join in as a lurker.
Sorry, this agenda makes it easier to see
On 08/02/2012 10:37, David Chisnall wrote:
Thank you for volunteering to organise this. It's good to see people with
both the motivation and experience required to do something well actively
contributing to the project.
Cheap copout. And quite sad, especially coming from a newly elected
On 08/02/2012 10:40, Warner Losh wrote:
One thing to remember about the IETF. There's many vendors that devote
significant resources to the IETF. While I was at Cisco, for example, I know
that we provided audio and video bridges to IEFT meetings to facilitate
remote attendance at the
On 08/02/2012 05:39, John Baldwin wrote:
I find this a bit ironic from you given that I've met you in person at
USENIX ATC which is an order of magnitude more expensive than BSDCan (and
in fact, one of the reasons the US-based BSDCon died and was effectively
supplanted by BSDCan was that
On 08/02/2012 11:12, David Chisnall wrote:
FreeBSD is a volunteer project.
Yeah, I get that. I've been around quite a bit longer than you have, in
case you didn't notice. :)
I understand what you're saying, it's going to take work to change this
mindset, and to provide these resources. If you
On 8/1/2012 8:36 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
I think this proves the point everybody has been saying: you are being
needlessly contrary and confrontational.
Actually if you take a step back and look at what Arnaud is saying
objectively, he's right. If anyone can attend the meeting by simply
getting
On 07/17/2012 22:54, Gustau Pérez i Querol wrote:
In fact filesystems not particulary specific and not tied our kernel
would go to userspace; thinks like smbfs, nwfs, ntfs, ext2 o ext4 for
example should be in userspace
A big -1 here.
The more native FS support we have the better off we are
On 07/13/2012 21:21, Jan Beich wrote:
It seems recent OpenSSL update broke fetch(1) for me.
$ diff -u $SRC_BASE/crypto/openssl/apps/openssl.cnf /etc/ssl/openssl.cnf
$ fetch https://foo/bar
fetch: https://foo/bar: Authentication error
Same error as with the patch for 1.0.0d from a
On 07/12/2012 05:03 PM, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
FYI, OpenSSL 1.0.1c import is complete now. Please let me know if you
have any problem.
Sorry if I missed it, but did you bump OSVERSION for this change? If
not, could you? It would be helpful for dealing with ports stuff,
especially USE_OPENSSL.
On 07/13/2012 05:26 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Thursday, July 12, 2012 5:16:41 pm Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/12/2012 02:11 PM, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
You might want to view Baptiste's pkgng presentation at BSDCan:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Hxq7AHZ27I
Sure, the next time I have an hour
On 07/13/2012 08:52 AM, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
On 2012-07-13 05:55:04 -0400, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/12/2012 05:03 PM, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
FYI, OpenSSL 1.0.1c import is complete now. Please let me know
if you have any problem.
Sorry if I missed it, but did you bump OSVERSION for this change
I do not mean this e-mail to be in any way critical. I was told after
the new OPTIONS framework discussion that I should have asked questions
before the change, so I'm asking these questions now; in a genuine
attempt to get information.
On 07/12/2012 03:01 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
In the
On 07/12/2012 02:11 PM, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
You might want to view Baptiste's pkgng presentation at BSDCan:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Hxq7AHZ27I
Sure, the next time I have an hour to spare.
I don't think what I'm asking for is unreasonable. One could even
conclude that answering
On 07/12/2012 03:02 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:48:41AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
I do not mean this e-mail to be in any way critical. I was told after
the new OPTIONS framework discussion that I should have asked questions
before the change, so I'm asking
On 07/08/2012 19:33, George Neville-Neil wrote:
A followup. zookeeper is now ported to Freebsd (/usr/ports/devel/zookeeper)
George, did you see the PR and the followup from me regarding the port?
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
On 07/08/2012 20:01, George Neville-Neil wrote:
On Jul 8, 2012, at 22:39 , Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/08/2012 19:33, George Neville-Neil wrote:
A followup. zookeeper is now ported to Freebsd (/usr/ports/devel/zookeeper)
George, did you see the PR and the followup from me regarding the port
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/03/2012 11:34, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 10:59:03AM +0200, Hartmann, O. wrote:
On 07/02/12 08:09, Sayetsky Anton wrote:
I will test libreoffice build on 8.3-RELEASE today or tomorrow.
I have both gstreamer and boost
On 07/04/2012 15:02, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
The thing, as I see it, is that people have to understand
this is a volunteer project and if people don't do things
by themselves they really can't demand someone else to
do it for them.
Of course. But that's totally different from, I don't use
renaming, NBSD will support all
NGNU options.
Thank you for the suggestion.
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: Doug Barton [mailto:do...@freebsd.org]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 2:02 PM
To: Oleg Moskalenko
Cc: FreeBSD Current
Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
On 06/29/2012 01:50 PM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
5) NBSD adds several of its own new proprietary options:
--mergesort
--qsort
--heapsort
--radixsort
--nthreads=... (multi-threaded build only)
Oleg,
First, thank you very much for providing both the performance numbers,
and the
On 06/26/2012 11:04 PM, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
Hi Folks,
as I announced before, the default sort in -CURRENT has been changed
to BSD sort.
Has this been performance tested vs. the old one? If so, where are the
results?
Since the import, the reported minor bugs have been
fixed and BSD sort
On 06/26/2012 11:48 PM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
-Original Message- From: Doug Barton
[mailto:do...@freebsd.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 11:18 PM
To: Gabor Kovesdan Cc: FreeBSD Current; Oleg Moskalenko Subject:
Re: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
On 06/26
On 06/27/2012 02:09 AM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
Doug, I'll post some performance figures, probably tomorrow.
That's great, thanks.
But I do not agree with you that we have to reproduce the old sort bugs.
It makes no sense and I am not going to do that. Absolutely not.
That isn't what I said.
On 06/27/2012 03:02 AM, Daniel Gerzo wrote:
On 27.06.2012 10:43, Doug Barton wrote:
On 06/27/2012 02:09 AM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
Doug, I'll post some performance figures, probably tomorrow.
That's great, thanks.
But I do not agree with you that we have to reproduce the old sort bugs
On 06/27/2012 07:30 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
--- Mer 27/6/12, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org ha scritto:
...
I believe we do not
make this kind of work with any vendor code that is
being updated in the
base;
Au contraire, we frequently avoid updating the old versions
of things we have
I officially withdraw from the discussion. I hope it all works out well.
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
On 06/24/2012 16:07, Steven Hartland wrote:
We added some new mount points recently and on reboot they failed to
come up after investigating we found that mountd runs too early in
the boot process to be able export filesystems that are marked as
late in /etc/fstab.
Our fix was simply to
Howdy,
This is an FYI to let people know about a really nice feature for those
that have ports installed which include kernel modules. You can place a
list in /etc/src.conf like this:
PORTS_MODULES= emulators/virtualbox-ose-kmod sysutils/fusefs-kmod
x11/nvidia-driver
which will cause those
On 06/09/2012 16:51, Doug Barton wrote:
Ok, never mind the last one ... this patch I've actually tested. :)
Committed to HEAD and MFC'ed. Thanks everyone for the feedback and help.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
I have recently tried the PORTS_MODULES knob, and found a problem. The
ports tree searches for some dependencies by finding a binary in PATH,
and that fails since by default /usr/local/ isn't there. The attached
patch fixes that problem.
It would be more robust to use PREFIX there instead of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
On 06/09/2012 10:40, Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 09/06/2012 18:26, Chris Rees wrote:
On 9 June 2012 18:15, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
I have recently tried the PORTS_MODULES knob, and found a
problem. The ports tree searches for some
Ok, after reading your PR and discussion on IRC I have the following
which incorporates all the suggestions so far. I haven't actually tested
this yet, but if people agree that this is the right direction to go I
will before I commit it of course.
Doug
--
It's always a long day;
Ok, never mind the last one ... this patch I've actually tested. :)
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Index: kern.post.mk
===
--- kern.post.mk(revision 236818)
+++ kern.post.mk(working
On 05/27/2012 07:05, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
Hi!
I'm running a little pet project of improving completeness of
tools/build/mk/OptionalObsoleteFiles.inc file and thus delete-old*
targets with regard to all possible WITHOUT_* knobs.
E.g. when WITHOUT_foo is defined in src.conf, make
On 05/28/2012 12:52, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
* Doug Barton (do...@freebsd.org) wrote:
I'm running a little pet project of improving completeness of
tools/build/mk/OptionalObsoleteFiles.inc file and thus delete-old*
targets with regard to all possible WITHOUT_* knobs.
E.g. when WITHOUT_foo
On 05/28/2012 13:23, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
On Mon, 28 May 2012 12:59:17 -0700 Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org
wrote:
this issue. The numerous problems we've had with it ever since it was
introduced seem to bear me out. :)
Can you list them? A missing obsolete file doesn't count
On 5/28/2012 3:05 PM, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
* Doug Barton (do...@freebsd.org) wrote:
this issue. The numerous problems we've had with it ever since it was
introduced seem to bear me out. :)
Can you list them? A missing obsolete file doesn't count.
It doesn't catch things it needs
On 05/26/2012 16:36, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no writes:
probably due to an issue in the latest openpam; sudo is not affected
should be fixed now.
Confirmed, thanks. :)
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
su
Segmentation fault: 11
no core is produced.
Currently broken: r236118
Previous r235567
sudo works.
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
On 05/24/2012 03:49 AM, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
[I looked for a better list to drop this on, but other that freebsd-rc
nothing seems close.]
freebsd-rc@ is not appropriate for discussing periodic, as the 2 are
totally unrelated.
At this time there is no dedicated maintainer for periodic, so
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 05/14/2012 06:35, Bryan Drewery wrote:
On 5/13/2012 6:15 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 5/12/2012 8:23 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote:
Hi,
I found service(8) to be inconsistent that it listed files with
`service -e`, but plain services
On 05/17/2012 02:51 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote:
Yeah it's what I get for mashing a pseudo example up and not testing it!
S'ok, I screwed up ${service##*/} in mine. :)
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
On 5/14/2012 12:02 AM, Ulrich Spoerlein wrote:
Uli - amazed that a change to a document that apparently no one is
reading can cause such a fuss.
... which is the point that several of us tried to make, and which you
seem to have ignored. The problem with committers not reading the
On 5/12/2012 8:23 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote:
Hi,
I found service(8) to be inconsistent that it listed files with `service
-e`, but plain services with `service -l`
That behavior is by design.
Thanks for your interest,
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
When you proposed these changes not only did I not see a consensus for
you to move forward, I saw a non-zero number of people push back.
Why did you proceed?
Doug
On 5/11/2012 9:08 AM, Ulrich Spoerlein wrote:
Author: uqs
Date: Fri May 11 16:08:51 2012
New Revision: 235275
URL:
On 05/07/2012 23:14, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
Finally, should my next step be to advance to the latest current + your
patch and see how I go from there?
Yep, so that patches will be tested before they go to head.
For the record, I upgraded to r235151 + the removal of those 2 locks and
haven't
Has anyone answered the original question? Are there going to be
packages for libreoffice? If not, why not?
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
On 05/06/2012 15:19, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
On 7 May 2012 01:54, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
I got this with today's current, previous (working) kernel is r232719.
panic: _mtx_lock_sleep: recursed on non-recursive mutex struct mount mtx
@ /frontier/svn/head/sys/kern/vfs_subr.c:4595
On 05/07/2012 13:11, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 12:28:41PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 05/06/2012 15:19, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
On 7 May 2012 01:54, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
I got this with today's current, previous (working) kernel is r232719.
panic
I got this with today's current, previous (working) kernel is r232719.
panic: _mtx_lock_sleep: recursed on non-recursive mutex struct mount mtx
@ /frontier/svn/head/sys/kern/vfs_subr.c:4595
FWIW I'm using ufs2, ext2fs, and msdosfs on this system. The panic
occurred right after loading the linux
1 - 100 of 865 matches
Mail list logo
