On Sun, Oct 31, 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
Aren't you enough of a FreeBSD sysadmin to know your previous kernel is
available as /kernel.old and that you can specify the kernel used at the
boot prompt?
That would work if you were sitting in front of the machines. All
my machines are
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
On Sun, Oct 31, 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
Aren't you enough of a FreeBSD sysadmin to know your previous kernel is
available as /kernel.old and that you can specify the kernel used at the
boot prompt?
That would work if you were sitting
On Mon, Nov 01, 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
That's the perfect example of how and where not to use
-CURRENT.
And your argument could be not to use -STABLE or -RELEASE since
both would have the same problems. Like I said before, it's not which
Quite the reverse. You _should_
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
On Mon, Nov 01, 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
That's the perfect example of how and where not to use
-CURRENT.
And your argument could be not to use -STABLE or -RELEASE since
both would have the same problems. Like I said before, it's
Vincent Poy wrote:
I have always read the -current mailing list but you have to
remember that by the time I do the update, the known problem should
already have been gone.
I assume you have a lousy way of expressing yourself (in this case) and
that you don't actually mean what you
On Sat, Oct 30, 1999 at 02:43:47PM -0700, Vincent Poy wrote:
Yes, I am still running -current. I read the -current mailing
list on a more regular basis than most of the people out there.
By what measure? I think you've shown the opposite.
I have always read the -current
On Sun, 31 Oct 1999, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sat, Oct 30, 1999 at 02:43:47PM -0700, Vincent Poy wrote:
Yes, I am still running -current. I read the -current mailing
list on a more regular basis than most of the people out there.
By what measure? I think you've shown the
echo '#include "i386/att.h"' tm.h
echo '#include "i386/freebsd.h"' tm.h
echo '#include "i386/perform.h"' tm.h
cc -c -O -pipe -I/usr/src/gnu/lib/libgcc/../../../contrib/egcs/gcc/config
-I/usr/src/gnu/lib/libgcc/../../../contrib/egcs/gcc -I. -fexceptions
-DIN_GCC
-I/usr/src/gnu/lib/libgcc/../../../contrib/egcs/gcc -I. -fexceptions
-DIN_GCC -I/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/include -DL_mulsi3 -o _mulsi3.o
/usr/src/gnu/lib/libgcc/../../../contrib/egcs/gcc/libgcc1.c
*** Signal 12
...snip...
Any ideas?
YES. DELETE, YES DELETE, CURRENT FROM YOUR MACHINE
On 30-Oct-99 Vincent Poy wrote:
Hmmm, I can understand the build/install portion but will it boot
since one machine is -CURRENT from 3/99 and the other is 3.3-RELEASE.
I highly advise that you read the last month's archive of the -current mailing
list archives:
On Sat, 30 Oct 1999, Will Andrews wrote:
On 30-Oct-99 Vincent Poy wrote:
Hmmm, I can understand the build/install portion but will it boot
since one machine is -CURRENT from 3/99 and the other is 3.3-RELEASE.
I highly advise that you read the last month's archive of the -current
On Sat, Oct 30, 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
Well, I try to stay up to date but there are times when I am busy
so things do get behind... I've ran -current since 1993. There is no
real reason to use -STABLE.
Give me one single reason why there is on real reason to use
-STABLE and I'll
Chris Costello writes:
On Sat, Oct 30, 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
Well, I try to stay up to date but there are times when I am busy
so things do get behind... I've ran -current since 1993. There is no
real reason to use -STABLE.
Give me one single reason why there is on real
Hmmm, I can understand the build/install portion but will it boot
since one machine is -CURRENT from 3/99 and the other is 3.3-RELEASE.
Are you still running current, Vince? I thought we established over a
year a go that -current was *not* for you since you don't take the
requisite time
I think a lot of the people who run older versions of -current, and
upgrade sporadically, have done so because there are particular things
missing out of -STABLE that they need (or want).
Which is a fair point, and hopefully we'll be branching 4.0 sooner
this time so the wait is not so long.
On Sat, 30 Oct 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
Hmmm, I can understand the build/install portion but will it boot
since one machine is -CURRENT from 3/99 and the other is 3.3-RELEASE.
Are you still running current, Vince? I thought we established over a
year a go that -current was
On Sat, 30 Oct 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
I was just worried
that rebooting with a new kernel before a world build might actually
render the system bootless.
If you're worried, then just
cp /usr/src/sys/compile/NAME/kernel /kernel.new
and reboot, using kernel.new
If it fails, you haven't
On Sat, 30 Oct 1999, Leif Neland wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 1999, Vincent Poy wrote:
I was just worried
that rebooting with a new kernel before a world build might actually
render the system bootless.
If you're worried, then just
cp /usr/src/sys/compile/NAME/kernel /kernel.new
and
18 matches
Mail list logo
