On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 03:13:15PM -0700, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 01:55:18PM +0300, Vallo Kallaste wrote:
This isn't a yesterdays problem, I've had this for a month or so.
The problem is explicit declaration of -march=p[234], use
CPUTYPE=i686 in
Anyone experiencing this problem might want to try the following
(beware cutpaste). I still don't understand why it is that I don't
see it. Is there a hidden build dependency? (I.e., does `sort' need
to be added to the list of build-tools?)
I'm to tired right now to look at ncurses, but it
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 03:59:46PM -0400, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 12:55:49 -0700
Crist J. Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems to have worked. Thanks.
Sorry for inconvenience, but could you please check that you got the
latest version of the patch. Both versions
--
Rebuilding the temporary build tree
--
stage 1: bootstrap tools
--
stage 2: cleaning up the object tree
Kris Kennaway wrote:
...I expect the problem will be resolved by those who have already
said they'll resolve it ;)
I obviously missed that discussion. I don't want to pester people
about things that they are already working on, so is there somewhere
besides the -current and cvs mailing lists
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:57:09 -0400, Garrett Wollman wrote:
Anyone experiencing this problem might want to try the following
(beware cutpaste). I still don't understand why it is that I don't
see it. Is there a hidden build dependency? (I.e., does `sort' need
to be added to the list of
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 12:29:35 +1000, Tim Robbins wrote:
A workaround might be to #undef _POSIX2_VERSION after #include'ing unistd.h
in posixver.c but I don't think that would be correct. It's probably better
Removing compatibility with +pos f.e. they just try to confirm POSIX,
because +N
Garrett Wollman wrote:
Anyone experiencing this problem might want to try the following
(beware cutpaste). I still don't understand why it is that I don't
see it...
If you don't see errors while building libc or libncurses just do
a 'make clean' in those directories first.
I'm too tired
I have built XFree86 at least 3 times in the past week, all with varying
levels of optimization, from -O to -O3 and ALWAYS with -march=pentium3.
All of the builds succeeded, although I had stability problems with -O2
and above. Are you _certain_ this is a compiler bug?
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002,
i'm pretty new to current so perhaps this in naive but are there any
point releases for testing --- i.e. releases that are known to build
properly?
the reason i ask is that i've got a problem and am not a coder but
essentially have no way to know whether it is worth reporting; whether it
is
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 09:47:44AM -0400, Wesley Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have built XFree86 at least 3 times in the past week, all with varying
levels of optimization, from -O to -O3 and ALWAYS with -march=pentium3.
All of the builds succeeded, although I had stability problems with
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 17:22:36 +0300
Vallo Kallaste [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 09:47:44AM -0400, Wesley Morgan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have built XFree86 at least 3 times in the past week, all with
varying levels of optimization, from -O to -O3 and ALWAYS with
--
Rebuilding the temporary build tree
--
stage 1: bootstrap tools
--
stage 2: cleaning up the object tree
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:52:10 -0500 (CDT)
Mike Silbersack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you want me to try your first patch? I never got a chance to test
it.(And no longer have a copy of it, either.)
No, there is a bug in the patch you tested. Could you please try again
with an updated patch?
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:00:45 -0700
Crist J. Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not too sure about that. Now I'm getting SIGSEGV again,
You are right. There was a stupid mistake in the latest version, sorry.
Could you try yet another patch?
http://people.freebsd.org/~kan/gcc-cpp.diff
--
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:52:10 -0500 (CDT)
Mike Silbersack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you want me to try your first patch? I never got a chance to test
it.(And no longer have a copy of it, either.)
No, there is a bug in the patch you
On Sun, 22 Sep 2002, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
On Sun, 22 Sep 2002 18:51:14 -0500 (CDT)
Mike Silbersack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm seeing the segfault in the kernel make depend step, just as
someone else reported.
OK, could you please try the patch at
Thanks to the wonderful sort breakage, I'm seeing this if I touch
cppmacro.c and make again:
=== cc_int
cc -O -pipe -mcpu=pentiumpro -DIN_GCC -DHAVE_CONFIG_H
-DPREFIX=\/usr\-I/usr/obj/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc_int/../cc_tools
-I/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc_int/../cc_tools
Hi!
Something checked-in yesterday broke the kernel badly.. Some of these
options or a combination of these break the kernel badly. If they're activatet then
not all devices are created by devfs (ttv* is missing..).
Even without devfs ttv* isn't working...
Commenting this out of my config fixed
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Garrett Wollman
writes:
Anyone experiencing this problem might want to try the following
(beware cutpaste). I still don't understand why it is that I don't
see it. Is there a hidden build dependency? (I.e., does `sort' need
to be added to the list of
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Marc Recht
writes:
--=.t8Cw0UW_4O(CPO
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi!
Something checked-in yesterday broke the kernel badly.. Some of these
options or a combination of these break the kernel badly. If they're
pkg_add coredumps when installing dependencies from remote. This is
really annoying because you have to manually track down dependencies and
install them (say, for a critical package like cvsup). This has been
reported multiple times and is 100% repeatable. It's been broken for a
few months
That's an odd set of things to have break in concert. The UFS options
should not affect devfs at all. That said, your best bet is probably to
turn off sets of related options until you figure out what the source is.
Obvious candidates would be to turn off the UFS options as a set, GEOM,
and
Mike Silbersack wrote:
Thanks to the wonderful sort breakage, I'm seeing this if I touch
cppmacro.c and make again:
building static cc_int library
sort: open failed: +1: No such file or directory
sort: open failed: +1: No such file or directory
This is easily fixed by patching
options UFS_ACL
This is a major suspect. Have you read what it does ?
Of course. It has been working for weeks..
options GEOM
This I can almost guarantee you, is not the culprit.
You're right.
The smbus/ic/iic/iicsmb stuff is what breaks the kernel for me.
Marc
That's an odd set of things to have break in concert. The UFS options
should not affect devfs at all. That said, your best bet is probably to
turn off sets of related options until you figure out what the source is.
Obvious candidates would be to turn off the UFS options as a set, GEOM,
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 05:46:15 -0700, walt wrote:
This line in /usr/src/contrib/ncurses/include/MKkey_defs.sh seems to
be the fix:
sed -e 's/[ ]\+//g' $DATA |sort -n -k 6 $data
I forward your fix to ncurses author. Please send your fix to our ncurses
maintainer ([EMAIL
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Marc Recht wrote:
That's an odd set of things to have break in concert. The UFS options
should not affect devfs at all. That said, your best bet is probably to
turn off sets of related options until you figure out what the source is.
Obvious candidates would be to
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, David Wolfskill wrote:
building static cc_int library
sort: open failed: +1: No such file or directory
sort: open failed: +1: No such file or directory
ranlib libcc_int.a
Any chance that's causing a problem?
To fix that (regardless of sort), s/sort +1/sort -k 2/ in
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:05:08PM -0500, Mike Silbersack wrote:
Ok, I fixed lorder.sh, and made gcc again from clean with Alexander's
patch. No change, I still see the same segmentation fault. Alexander,
how can I easily build gcc with full debugging symbols? That might make
the backtrace
You may already know this, but the GNU sort also check for the environment
variable _POSIX2_VERSION, and according to the docs setting it to 199209
will revert to the old style usage (and unbreak world I am guessing)
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED],
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:24:38PM +0100, Fergus Cameron wrote:
i'm pretty new to current so perhaps this in naive but are there any
point releases for testing --- i.e. releases that are known to build
properly?
The Developer Preview #2 should be out sometime in the next month or
two. Aside
Just a quick scan turns up these suspects in need of revision:
/usr/src/etc/security
/usr/src/etc/periodic/daily/440.status-named
/usr/src/etc/periodic/monthly/200.accounting
/usr/src/etc/periodic/security/100.chksetuid
/usr/src/etc/periodic/security/800.loginfail
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 22:32:01 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
Please send your fix to our ncurses
maintainer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) too for commiting.
Not needed, I use _POSIX_VERSION=199209 environment workaround in
lib/libncurses/Makefile.
--
Andrey A. Chernov
http://ache.pp.ru/
To
Tim Robbins wrote:
On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 01:43:38PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 10:17:41PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
flat# date | sort +5n
sort: open failed: +5n: No such file or directory
This breaks the build in libncurses...
POSIX
Here's my suggested fix:
stash% pwd
/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/sort
stash% cvs diff -uN
cvs diff: Diffing .
Index: posixver.c
===
RCS file: posixver.c
diff -N posixver.c
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -
+++ posixver.c 24 Sep
I left my FreeBSD-current workstation at home running for a few hours,
and returned to find the configured snake saver running. When I
pressed Shift to get the screen saver to stop, the console went
blank and stopped updating. I broke into DDB and used panic to stop
everything (mostly a couple
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 13:30:11 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
party scripts that use +n syntax.
I am most unhappy with this change. :-(
It will be possible to have both variants, but +N is valid filename per
POSIX, so
Peter Wemm wrote:
Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
party scripts that use +n syntax.
I am most unhappy with this change. :-(
I'll say it again: unconditionally complying POSIX is an impediment
to getting real work done. 8-(.
I would be very happy
I keep getting my dmesg flooded with this:
ACPI-1046: *** Error: AcpiEvGpeDispatch: No handler or method for
GPE[9], disabling event
ACPI-1046: *** Error: AcpiEvGpeDispatch: No handler or method for
GPE[9], disabling event
And it feels kind of warm, is there a way to force the fans on? I
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 13:43:08 -0700, Bill Fenner wrote:
Here's my suggested fix:
Please, no. They do the right thing. You can bypass it setting
_POSIX2_VERSION=199209 in the environment.
--
Andrey A. Chernov
http://ache.pp.ru/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 11:43:22AM -0400, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:00:45 -0700
Crist J. Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not too sure about that. Now I'm getting SIGSEGV again,
You are right. There was a stupid mistake in the latest version, sorry.
Could you try yet
Please, no. They do the right thing.
I guess there are varying definitions of what the right thing is.
I don't think it's widely known that the +/- syntax was obsoleted.
I am vaguely a standards weenie and I didn't know.
Bill
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:30:11 -0700, Peter Wemm [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
party scripts that use +n syntax.
I am most unhappy with this change. :-(
The time to complain about it was back in 1992when the old syntax was
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:05:08PM -0500, Mike Silbersack wrote:
Ok, I fixed lorder.sh, and made gcc again from clean with Alexander's
patch. No change, I still see the same segmentation fault. Alexander,
how can I easily build gcc with full
Until sh, make, tar, and so on also drop behaviours that are
not specified by POSIX, it's really silly to make sort drop them.
It's not that the +x/-y argument syntax is not specified - it's that
it's specifically disallowed. (I disagree with that restriction, but
let's at least have the right
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 13:59:02 -0700, Bill Fenner wrote:
Please, no. They do the right thing.
I guess there are varying definitions of what the right thing is.
I mean just:
1) We all agree targeting POSIX, so POSIX conformance is the right thing.
2) If we use _POSIX2_VERSION 2001* in our
It's not like people didn't have nine years' advance warning to fix
their scripts.
When's the first time the FreeBSD sort(1) man page mentioned that this
syntax was deprecated? Can we at least start from there?
Bill
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 16:07:39 -0500 (CDT)
Mike Silbersack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:05:08PM -0500, Mike Silbersack wrote:
Ok, I fixed lorder.sh, and made gcc again from clean with
Alexander's patch. No change, I
Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:30:11 -0700, Peter Wemm [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
party scripts that use +n syntax.
I am most unhappy with this change. :-(
The time to complain about it was back
Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 13:30:11 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
party scripts that use +n syntax.
I am most unhappy with this change. :-(
It will be possible to have both variants, but +N
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 16:07:39 -0500 (CDT)
Mike Silbersack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:05:08PM -0500, Mike Silbersack wrote:
Ok, I fixed lorder.sh, and made gcc again
Bill Fenner wrote:
Here's my suggested fix:
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+/*
+ * Tell GNU sort(1) to implement the obsolete +1 -0 syntax even though
+ * it has been removed from the version of POSIX that the rest of
+ * the system conforms to.
+ */
+int posix2_version(void) {
+ return 0;
+}
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 14:39:01 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
Bill Fenner wrote:
Here's my suggested fix:
+}
Try something like this:
If you want something like this, here is less broken way:
--- lib/posixver.c.bak Fri Jun 7 11:24:45 2002
+++ lib/posixver.c Wed Sep 25 01:42:01
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 14:09:31 -0700, Bill Fenner [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
When's the first time the FreeBSD sort(1) man page mentioned that this
syntax was deprecated? Can we at least start from there?
It does not appear to have ever been properly documented.
I don't object to maintaining
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 14:26:43 -0700, Peter Wemm [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Closed payware standards do not count as 'fair warning'. I still have
never been able to see a posix standard.
Go to a library. Or go to http://www.opengroup.org/ and register for
free on-line access.
-GAWollman
To
Nope, still getting it.
I was able to reproduce the crash with your config file and unpatched
GCC, however crash does not happen when I use the patch. Are you using
make buildkernel or old config/make method?
options IPSEC_ESP
That is killing it. If I comment out that option, I
I think a lot of people would be happier if we could maintain backwards
compatability (and document the fact that they're extremely obsolete)
for a few more releases. Despite the fact that the main UNIX reference
that I use was published in 1984, I don't actually want everything to
stay the
At 6:02 PM -0400 9/24/02, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Bill Fenner [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
When's the first time the FreeBSD sort(1) man page mentioned that
this syntax was deprecated? Can we at least start from there?
It does not appear to have ever been properly
Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 14:09:31 -0700, Bill Fenner [EMAIL PROTECTED] s
aid:
When's the first time the FreeBSD sort(1) man page mentioned that this
syntax was deprecated? Can we at least start from there?
It does not appear to have ever been properly documented.
Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 14:26:43 -0700, Peter Wemm [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Closed payware standards do not count as 'fair warning'. I still have
never been able to see a posix standard.
Go to a library. Or go to http://www.opengroup.org/ and register for
free
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Fenner)
Date: Tue 24 Sep, 2002
Subject: Re: Who broke sort(1) ?
When's the first time the FreeBSD sort(1) man page mentioned that this
syntax was deprecated? Can we at least start from there?
I echo this sentiment. Ideally, two 4.x releases would document
--
Rebuilding the temporary build tree
--
stage 1: bootstrap tools
--
stage 2: cleaning up the object tree
On 2002-09-24 13:30, Peter Wemm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
party scripts that use +n syntax.
And ports. Lots of them. Dozens of them :(
I just noticed that textproc/ispell doesn't work anymore for me.
More will appear
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Garrett Wollman)
Date: Tue 24 Sep, 2002
Subject: Re: Who broke sort(1) ?
I don't object to maintaining backwards compatibility for a few more
releases (even if the application writers are the ones at fault),
Umm, their fault may simply have been that they wrote the
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Wemm)
Date: Tue 24 Sep, 2002
Subject: Re: Who broke sort(1) ?
How many successful widely distributed OS's are there that does not allow
sort +N as a numeric argument by default? (I'm sure somebody can dig up
an obscure linux distribution or some
Alexander Kabaev wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:00:45 -0700
Crist J. Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not too sure about that. Now I'm getting SIGSEGV again,
You are right. There was a stupid mistake in the latest version, sorry.
Could you try yet another patch?
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Peter Wemm wrote:
Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 14:26:43 -0700, Peter Wemm [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Closed payware standards do not count as 'fair warning'. I still have
never been able to see a posix standard.
Go to a library. Or go to
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Mike Silbersack wrote:
Yep, STRIP= was the necessary trick, I didn't realize that install -s
meant strip. :)
As to your patch... it turns out that I wasn't using it. I've been
testing with make buildkernel, which uses the copy of gcc built by your
last buildworld,
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Evans)
Date: Wed 25 Sep, 2002
Subject: Re: Who broke sort(1) ?
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Peter Wemm wrote:
A 1991 draft version is still available at:
http://www.funet.fi/pub/doc/posix/posix
Nice directory listing.
s/http/ftp/ and s/www/ftp/ and I get
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 12:06:45AM +, attila! wrote:
However, I do object to GNU's heavy handed removal of a
flag which is in extensive use. I don't have a problem
with the new syntax, but leave the old one intact
-k, --key=POS1[,POS2]
start a
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
/usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_mount.c: In function `checkdirs':
/usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_mount.c:1141: warning: implicit declaration of function `vrefcnt'
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
/usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_mount.c: In function `checkdirs':
/usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_mount.c:1141: warning: implicit declaration of function
`vrefcnt'
Oops, I commited this file before I commited a dependency. Please cvsup
again. Specifically, you need the
--
Rebuilding the temporary build tree
--
stage 1: bootstrap tools
--
stage 2: cleaning up the object tree
74 matches
Mail list logo
