Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?

On Fri, 04 May 2001 00:00:58 +0200, J Wunsch wrote: We are, but why would we use anything else than GENERIC for it, seriously? I'd never roll a `release' for my current machine. When you get commitment to a fixed hardware configuration for two years and you want to leave your datacenter

You've Been Added!

This message is to confirm the addition of your email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the BlackOffers.com Newsletters Subscribe Me mailing list. If you feel you have received this notice in error, please visit the BlackOffers.com Newsletters Subscribe Me mailing list at our website:

You've Been Removed!

This message is to confirm the removal of your email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the BlackOffers.com Newsletters Subscribe Me mailing list. We're sorry to see you go! If you feel you have received this notice in error, please visit the BlackOffers.com Newsletters Subscribe Me mailing list

Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?

J Wunsch wrote: Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't anyone but me and Walnut Creek cum BSDI cum Windriver Systems using make release?!? We are, but why would we use anything else than GENERIC for it, seriously? I'd never roll a `release' for my current machine. Examples

Re: isdn stops working when load increases

On 3 Mai, Jens Schweikhardt wrote: # However, as soon as I do a find / or buildworld or some other # commands increasing the load significantly (about 1 or more), # isdnd seems to take a nap. No more packets transmitted. If I # suspend the running programs, isdnd awakes and continues.

Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?

tlambert2 Examples abound: All of examples are just we want yet another *generic* kernel for specific machines. Why you don't replace src/sys/${arch}/conf/GENERIC file to your own (customized) version? It is too simple, and matches your requirements. -- - Makoto `MAR' MATSUSHITA To

Re: Rfork'd threads, signals, and LDTs

On Wed, 2 May 2001, Daniel Eischen wrote: On Wed, 2 May 2001, Bruce Evans wrote: I am planning on using %fs for TSD/KSD and want it to be valid in signal handlers. Imagine doing the same thing with %ds, or better yet, %ss. %ss must be set to the default for the kernel to even

Re: lockup after resume

On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 11:10:54AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Georg-W. Koltermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am experiencing a strange lockup with -current as of about a week ago: It will suspend and resume, but after the resume the console is dead and the system hangs after a

Re: lockup after resume

Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 14:39:12 +0200 From: Georg-W. Koltermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] I CVSuped twice since my initial report, and the problem is still there. On the other hand I have a report from David Wolfskill that suspend/resume works fine for him. Right. c) David, since it seems to work for

Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?

On Fri, 04 May 2001 20:38:06 +0900, Makoto MATSUSHITA wrote: All of examples are just we want yet another *generic* kernel for specific machines. Why you don't replace src/sys/${arch}/conf/GENERIC file to your own (customized) version? It is too simple, and matches your requirements.

Re: isdn stops working when load increases

On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:03:26PM +0200, Jens Schweikhardt wrote: Hello, I've seen some recent mails related to rtprio oddity which seemed to also affect the isdnd. My -current is cvsupped May 1st (and survived; I've still got a fully populated root fs :-) However, as soon as I do a

Re: lockup after resume

Georg-W. Koltermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: a) Does suspend/resume now work for you? No, but I haven't upgraded my kernel since right before Easter. b) What hardware/firmware do you have (mine is a DELL Inspiron 7500 with BIOS rev A12)? IBM ThinkPad 600E, don't remember the firmware

-CURRENT buildworld broken....

In: stage 4: make dependencies ... === secure/usr.bin/ssh-keyscan rm -f .depend mkdep -f .depend -a-DNO_IDEA -I/usr/obj/usr/src/i386/usr/include /usr/src/secure/usr.bin/ssh-keyscan/../../../crypto/openssh/ssh-keyscan.c cd /usr/src/secure/usr.bin/ssh-keyscan; make _EXTRADEPEND echo

Re: HEADS UP! bad bug in -current.

In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we can all take lessons from phk here -- he achieves a level of destructiveness that makes even the pro's marvel in wonder. Your criticism is grossly unfair. Throughout the very long time he's been active in this

Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?

On 04-May-01 Sheldon Hearn wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2001 00:00:58 +0200, J Wunsch wrote: We are, but why would we use anything else than GENERIC for it, seriously? I'd never roll a `release' for my current machine. When you get commitment to a fixed hardware configuration for two years

FW: Snapshot Log - world broken

=== libpam/modules/pam_tacplus cc -O -pipe -Wall -I/usr/src/lib/libpam/modules/pam_tacplus/../../../../contrib/libpam/libpam/incl ude -I/usr/src/lib/libpam/mo dules/pam_tacplus/../../libpam -I/usr/obj/usr/src/i386/usr/include -c /usr/src/lib/libpam/modules/pam_tacplus/pam_tacplus.c -o

world broken (sshd)

It looks like world does not currently compile: some files have been removed from src/crypto/openssh/ a few hours ago, but are still listed in SRCS in secure/usr.sbin/sshd/Makefile. Possible workaround: --- secure/usr.sbin/sshd/Makefile.dist Fri May 4 17:10:19 2001 +++

Re: HEADS UP! bad bug in -current.

John Polstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Your criticism is grossly unfair. Throughout the very long time he's been active in this project, PHK's contribution/breakage ratio has been unsurpassed. And btw., the recent stdio breakage wasn't all that bad either, and it completely happened in

Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?

Sheldon Hearn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That said, I don't think that the release should pick up KERNCONF. I think a middle-ground option is to have the release pick up RELEASE_KERNCONF. That sounds best to me. -- cheers, Jorg .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL

Re: HEADS UP! bad bug in -current.

In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we can all take lessons from phk here -- he achieves a level of destructiveness that makes even the pro's marvel in wonder. Your criticism is grossly unfair. Too much

Re: Rfork'd threads, signals, and LDTs

On Fri, 4 May 2001, Bruce Evans wrote: On Wed, 2 May 2001, Daniel Eischen wrote: On Wed, 2 May 2001, Bruce Evans wrote: There is also the osendsig() case, and corresponding code in several emulators. I don't think we care too much about osendsig() since anything that uses a new

Re: Rfork'd threads, signals, and LDTs

Daniel Eischen writes: OK, thanks. Here's my guess at what should be changed for the Linux emulator. If this looks correct, I'll commit it. Hmm, I wonder how linuxthreads works under FreeBSD without this change... Well, they've never worked perfectly, by any means. Perhaps

Re: HEADS UP! bad bug in -current.

On Fri, 4 May 2001, John Polstra wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we can all take lessons from phk here -- he achieves a level of destructiveness that makes even the pro's marvel in wonder. Your criticism is grossly unfair.