Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-10-05 Thread Warner Losh
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marcel Moolenaar writes: : Yes, but if you need the tools you just compiled in your : cross-compilation for cross-compilation itself, you'll have a big : problem. And that's almost exacly what happens when building world... No. The cross build world takes care to

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-10-05 Thread Warner Losh
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] John-Mark Gurney writes: : I thought we were working to the point that we could build a mips world : on an x86 box?? w/ this, it completely breaks it... the whole idea of : a buildworld is that the tools can be build on ANY platform and run, : (assuming the tools

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-10-03 Thread David O'Brien
I'm not working on changing the build/installworld. There's nothing "broken" about having to install the kernel first, IMO. I don't see how I can "fix" it then. In fact for OpenBSD (and I'll assume NetBSD) their `build world' procedure is to first compile a new config(8), then build and

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-10-03 Thread Doug
David O'Brien wrote: I'm not working on changing the build/installworld. There's nothing "broken" about having to install the kernel first, IMO. I don't see how I can "fix" it then. In fact for OpenBSD (and I'll assume NetBSD) their `build world' procedure is to first compile a new

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-10-01 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
John-Mark Gurney wrote: you don't under stand, we are NOT talking about upgrades, we are talking about how to make a buildable system on -stable... the make buildworld -DNOTOOLS does not work, and will not work for what I like to do.. I need tools from -current that RUN ON -stable... I do

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
[cc list trimmed] John-Mark Gurney wrote: actually, no, I would like this fixed... I will be unable to develope FreeBSD if the tools target doesn't work!! I do all of my compiles on a 3.0-R box (yes, that's right, 3.0-R) and it will basicly stop me from doing any of that... I'm not sure

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread John-Mark Gurney
Marcel Moolenaar scribbled this message on Sep 30: [cc list trimmed] John-Mark Gurney wrote: actually, no, I would like this fixed... I will be unable to develope FreeBSD if the tools target doesn't work!! I do all of my compiles on a 3.0-R box (yes, that's right, 3.0-R) and it will

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Reinier Bezuidenhout
I know this is not topic related, so appologies in advance ... Sometimes people deserve a pat on the back. This is the best thing since Chocolate Chip cookies :) We're running things like myth2_demo, and it opens the doors to a whole bunch of applications ... e.g. C++ Builder to follow next

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Amancio Hasty
Without proper linux support we are dead . Now I have to get off my soap box and let the work continue 8) Best Regards -- Amancio Hasty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
Amancio Hasty wrote: BTW: I think that what you are doing is really great !! Thanks! Hmm... I wonder if the volume in the list will increase with cool apps such as IBM's ViaVoice which needs your mods to work. Already Linux binaries have been tested and confirmed working with the new

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
Richard Wackerbarth wrote: There is nothing fundamental in the toolset which SHOULD care about the underlying kernel. Compilers, loaders, etc. are just programs that operate on the contents of files. Think of compiling the 4.0 system on a 3.3 system as a simpler case of cross compiling. I

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
John-Mark Gurney wrote: but I'm developing for -current... I do a buildworld on my 3.0-R box and move it over to the box after it's complete... I'm not sure about you, but doing a buildworld over nfs w/ a processor that is sub p133 is not something that really works to well... Ah, now I

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Andrew Reilly
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 01:41:41PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 01:29:40AM +1000, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: Before attempting to build world, you must make and install a new kernel. The new kernel will contain new syscalls that are needed during build world. doscmd is

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Brad Knowles
At 10:17 PM + 1999/9/29, Adam Strohl wrote: Furthermore, for when 4.0 becomes a -R or -S, ftping in a compiled kernel shouldn't be that hard of a price to pay for going from 3.2. /stand/sysinstall based upgrades could easily seemlessly take care of this, too. I must confess

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Maxim Sobolev
As a fresh idea (probably stupid, but anyway): Why we can't load compile and small KLD with all necessary syscalls (even probably stubs) to build 4.0 world when someone trying to build it on top of 3.*? -Maxim -- "We believe in the Power and the Might!" (Manowar, 1996)

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Maxim Sobolev
Maxim Sobolev wrote: Why we can't load compile and small KLD with all necessary syscalls (even ^^^ I mean ".load and compile small". Cut and paste technology sometimes plays bad jokes with us.;) -Max To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread John Polstra
Marcel Moolenaar wrote: As for AMD, I don't use it. I'll dig into manpages, source code and whatsnot. If possible I'll reconfigure something here so that I can test it on a i386. Thanks. I'll try to get you a stack trace from it today if I can find time. BTW: I'm sorry, that a simple bug

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote: commit. But even then I still ran into problems, although I'm not sure how closely related they are to the changes made. My problems seem to be with the Soren's ata drivers. I'm using Soren's ATA drivers myself without problems. Admitted, I'm only using it to play

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Kenneth Wayne Culver
I would have to agree with that. I have never seen such a well documented commit. But even then I still ran into problems, although I'm not sure how closely related they are to the changes made. My problems seem to be with the Soren's ata drivers. The good old "lost contact with device" messages

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread John-Mark Gurney
Maxim Sobolev scribbled this message on Sep 30: [-- Warning: koi8-r is not compatible with your display.] Maxim Sobolev wrote: Why we can't load compile and small KLD with all necessary syscalls (even ^^^ I mean ".load and compile small". Cut

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread John-Mark Gurney
Marcel Moolenaar scribbled this message on Sep 30: Try -DNOTOOLS. I don't know if the -current sources depend specifically on -current tools (such as egcs). well, this may work, but it still doesn't produce a "clean" system to build with... I don't know the number of times that I've used the

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Bill Fumerola
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: The upgrading from -stable to -current is currently being tested by Bill Fumerola. I can imagine that some might be broken in that case. This I will attempt to fix, then... As others have mentioned 3.3-STABLE right now cannot build 4.0-CURRENT

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Peter Wemm
John-Mark Gurney wrote: [..] might as well say goodbye to ever getting freebsd's userland running under NetBSD which is how our nice Alpha port got started... this NEEDS to be fixed... NetBSD have just done exactly the same sort of thing. And for that matter it makes no difference for that

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Doug
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Brad Knowles wrote: At 10:17 PM + 1999/9/29, Adam Strohl wrote: Furthermore, for when 4.0 becomes a -R or -S, ftping in a compiled kernel shouldn't be that hard of a price to pay for going from 3.2. /stand/sysinstall based upgrades could easily seemlessly take

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
John-Mark Gurney wrote: the reason I was on Marcel's back was because of his statement that he WOULD NOT do ANYTHING to fix the problem, and that as far as he was considered, that's life and deal w/ it... if he had said, oh, I'll look for a solution to the problem, I wouldn't of been so

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Don Lewis
On Sep 30, 11:24pm, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: } Subject: Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed } As for me, I'm trying to define the problem as detailed and consise as } possible. I already have some specific thoughts and ideas. I'm thinking } large here: real cross-compilation capabilities

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread John-Mark Gurney
Don Lewis scribbled this message on Sep 30: On Sep 30, 11:24pm, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: } Subject: Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed } As for me, I'm trying to define the problem as detailed and consise as } possible. I already have some specific thoughts and ideas. I'm thinking

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread John-Mark Gurney
Marcel Moolenaar scribbled this message on Sep 30: John-Mark Gurney wrote: the reason I was on Marcel's back was because of his statement that he WOULD NOT do ANYTHING to fix the problem, and that as far as he was considered, that's life and deal w/ it... if he had said, oh, I'll look

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Nate Williams
you don't under stand, we are NOT talking about upgrades, we are talking about how to make a buildable system on -stable... There are essentially the same problem. In order to do an upgrade, you have to be able to build on -stable. :) === libgcc echo '#include i386/xm-i386.h' config.h

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Don Lewis
On Sep 30, 4:14pm, John-Mark Gurney wrote: } Subject: Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed } } In this particular case, the only thing cross-compilation would buy us } is the ability to build (but not install) 4.x binaries on a machine } running 3.x. It sounds like some folks would

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Peter Jeremy
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999, you wrote: On Sep 30, 4:14pm, John-Mark Gurney wrote: } Subject: Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed } } In this particular case, the only thing cross-compilation would buy us } is the ability to build (but not install) 4.x binaries on a machine } running 3.x

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread John-Mark Gurney
Don Lewis scribbled this message on Sep 30: On Sep 30, 4:14pm, John-Mark Gurney wrote: } Subject: Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed } } In this particular case, the only thing cross-compilation would buy us } is the ability to build (but not install) 4.x binaries on a machine

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread John-Mark Gurney
Nate Williams scribbled this message on Sep 30: you don't under stand, we are NOT talking about upgrades, we are talking about how to make a buildable system on -stable... There are essentially the same problem. In order to do an upgrade, you have to be able to build on -stable. :)

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Nate Williams
P.S. It is really hard for me to not make personal attacks against you after all of the above and completely ignoring the rest of my message. No, I didn't. My statement was that your 'confrontational' style of email wasn't making things any better. Mellow it out, and instead of attacking

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread John-Mark Gurney
Nate Williams scribbled this message on Sep 30: P.S. It is really hard for me to not make personal attacks against you after all of the above and completely ignoring the rest of my message. No, I didn't. My statement was that your 'confrontational' style of email wasn't making things any

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-30 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
John-Mark Gurney wrote: if people are interested, I can take a look at it... it'd be interesting to be able to do something like; make prep-installworld; rm -rf /usr/{sbin,bin,lib} /{bin,sbin}; make installworld and have it complete... :) Yes, please. Don't forget to install the newly

HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
I just finished committing the sigset_t changes I worked on for the last 5 weeks. Before attempting to build world, you must make and install a new kernel. The new kernel will contain new syscalls that are needed during build world. doscmd is currently not being build because it needs fixing

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Daniel C. Sobral
Marcel Moolenaar wrote: These libraries either a) have one of the modified structures visible in the interface, or b) use sigset_t internally and may cause breakage if new binaries are used against libraries that don't have the sigset_t change. This not an immediate issue, but will be as

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread John Polstra
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Marcel Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alpha users are invited to test the changes since I've not been able to do that myself. I've done all I possibly could do to make this a success. It looks like real bad news for the Alpha. :-( I built and installed

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Doug
On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: I just finished committing the sigset_t changes I worked on for the last 5 weeks. Before attempting to build world, you must make and install a new kernel. The new kernel will contain new syscalls that are needed during build world. doscmd is

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
John Polstra wrote: I suspect it's caused by the trailing backslash in the "doscmd" line near the end: strip # doscmd \ .endif It doesn't give me any problems... Anyway, when the make buildworld failed, I tried to do a "cvs status" or some such thing, which

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
John Polstra wrote: Marcel Moolenaar wrote: John Polstra wrote: strip # doscmd \ .endif It doesn't give me any problems... Weird! It doesn't seem like the Alpha make should be different. As a first "guess": Either sendsig/sigreturn or setjmp/longjmp

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread John Polstra
Marcel Moolenaar wrote: John Polstra wrote: strip # doscmd \ .endif It doesn't give me any problems... Weird! It doesn't seem like the Alpha make should be different. I haven't found the bottom of the stack yet (11000 frames and counting ...). Let me know if

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread John Polstra
Following up on my previous mail regarding the panic on the Alpha, I've been looking at the diff for the code in question, in "src/sys/nfs/nfs_socket.c": @@ -1501,14 +1502,16 @@ struct nfsreq *rep; register struct proc *p; { + sigset_t tmpset; + tmpset =

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread John Polstra
Marcel Moolenaar wrote: Ok, this should do it. If it looks good to you, I'll commit this... I'm running it now, and so far it seems to have solved the problem. Could you also please get rid of that "# doscmd \" line from usr.bin/Makefile? Thanks, John To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Nate Williams
Following up on my previous mail regarding the panic on the Alpha, I've been looking at the diff for the code in question, in "src/sys/nfs/nfs_socket.c": @@ -1501,14 +1502,16 @@ struct nfsreq *rep; register struct proc *p; { + sigset_t tmpset; + tmpset =

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
Doug wrote: On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: Is there any way at all that we can change this process so that building the kernel first is not required? IIRC, you can use -DNOTOOLS. In that case the current tools are assumed to be sufficient for building world. But, you

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Marcel Moolenaar
John Polstra wrote: Following up on my previous mail regarding the panic on the Alpha, I've been looking at the diff for the code in question, in "src/sys/nfs/nfs_socket.c": @@ -1501,14 +1502,16 @@ struct nfsreq *rep; register struct proc *p; { + sigset_t

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread John Polstra
Marcel Moolenaar wrote: Ok, this should do it. If it looks good to you, I'll commit this... Yes, it looks fine to me. You may not be able to commit it right away, though. It looks like freefall is down. Maybe they're putting in the new disk. I'll try the patch a little bit later today,

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Harold Gutch
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 11:55:23AM -0700, Doug wrote: On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: I just finished committing the sigset_t changes I worked on for the last 5 weeks. Before attempting to build world, you must make and install a new kernel. The new kernel will contain

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Rodney W. Grimes
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Harold Gutch wrote: Uhm, that's the way I see it being _right now_ as well. What I was thinking of, was that things would go smoother if you wouldn't upgrade _right now_, but in [insert some time in the near future here], as things would perhaps be "fixed" by then.

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Doug
On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Ben Rosengart wrote: On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Harold Gutch wrote: I interpreted the way of currently handling things (build the kernel first, then the userland) to be a _temporary_ solution, that Marcel was working on being fixed. If this is not the case, then I agree

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Doug
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Harold Gutch wrote: Uhm, that's the way I see it being _right now_ as well. What I was thinking of, was that things would go smoother if you wouldn't upgrade _right now_, but in [insert some time in the near future here], as things would perhaps be "fixed" by then.

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Garrett Wollman
On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 21:17:48 -0400, Jim Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I believe this must be fixed. There is no way it can be ``fixed''. That's Just The Way It Is. I'm sorry that you're having a problem with this. Nobody ever said keeping -current would be easy. -GAWollman -- Garrett A.

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Garrett Wollman
On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 16:51:37 -0700 (PDT), "Rodney W. Grimes" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: If it is broken, please back out the signal changes or fix the tools target. No, Rod, just Deal With It(tm). -GAWollman To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current"

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Adam Strohl
On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Jim Bloom wrote: I believe this must be fixed. At some point in time, there is going to be another change to the kernel such that some older version of the code cannot run on a new kernel. I believe this situation has occurred before. This will lead to a situation

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Peter Jeremy
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 08:17:16AM +1000, Adam Strohl wrote: On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Jim Bloom wrote: I believe this must be fixed. At some point in time, there is going to be another change to the kernel such that some older version of the code cannot run on a new kernel. FTPing a GENERIC kernel

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread John Polstra
I got world built and installed OK on the alpha now, and things generally seem OK. However, amd dumped core with a SEGV immediately upon startup. I haven't had even a second to try to debug it yet. Just thought I'd let you know about it. John -- John Polstra

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Peter Jeremy
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 01:29:40AM +1000, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: Before attempting to build world, you must make and install a new kernel. The new kernel will contain new syscalls that are needed during build world. doscmd is currently not being build because it needs fixing first. I'd like to

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Richard Wackerbarth
On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Garrett Wollman wrote: On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 21:17:48 -0400, Jim Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I believe this must be fixed. There is no way it can be ``fixed''. That's Just The Way It Is. I'm sorry that you're having a problem with this. Nobody ever said keeping

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Leif Neland
Would it at least be possible to add a test to the make-world makefile, saying "if kernel_version xyzzy then echo 'Sorry, install new kernel first' exit 9 fi" Leif To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Peter Jeremy
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 02:37:45PM +1000, Warner Losh wrote: In keeping notes, what would need to happen would be that you'd have to build config as well as all the tools to build binaries. We might be able to get away with temporarily replacing the i386/include/atomic.h[1] with the one from

Re: HEADS UP: sigset_t changes committed

1999-09-29 Thread Jeremy Lea
Hi, On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 10:07:07PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote: Garrett Wollman scribbled this message on Sep 29: On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 16:51:37 -0700 (PDT), "Rodney W. Grimes" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: If it is broken, please back out the signal changes or fix the tools target.