TB --- 2013-03-15 06:30:20 - tinderbox 2.10 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2013-03-15 06:30:20 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB ---
Hi Rick, all,
is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0,
or to keep both around indefinately?
I'm talking about:
oldNFS in sys/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver} NFSv2+NFSv3
newNFS in sys/fs/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver} NFSv2+NFSv3+NFSv4
NewNFS supports newer NFS
Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hi Rick, all,
is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0,
or to keep both around indefinately?
I'm talking about:
oldNFS in sys/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver} NFSv2+NFSv3
newNFS in sys/fs/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver} NFSv2+NFSv3+NFSv4
Hi,
this reminds me that I ran into an issue lately with the new NFS and locking
for NFSv3 mounts on a client that ran -CURRENT and a server that ran -STABLE.
When I ran portmaster -a on the client, which mounted /usr/ports and
/usr/local, as well as the location of the respective sqlite
Lars Eggert wrote:
Hi,
this reminds me that I ran into an issue lately with the new NFS and
locking for NFSv3 mounts on a client that ran -CURRENT and a server
that ran -STABLE.
When I ran portmaster -a on the client, which mounted /usr/ports and
/usr/local, as well as the location of
On 15.03.2013 15:01, Eggert, Lars wrote:
Hi,
this reminds me that I ran into an issue lately with the new NFS and locking
for NFSv3 mounts on a client that ran -CURRENT and a server that ran
-STABLE.
When I ran portmaster -a on the client, which mounted /usr/ports and
/usr/local, as well as
On Thursday, March 14, 2013 1:41:04 am Waitman Gobble wrote:
Hi,
I swapped out the CPU on this machine today, I don't recall seeing these
messages previously:
acpi0: reservation of 0, a (3) failed
acpi0: reservation of 10, bfcd (3) failed
You can ignore those. acpi is
On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hi Rick, all,
is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0,
or to keep both around indefinately?
I'm talking about:
oldNFS in sys/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver} NFSv2+NFSv3
newNFS in sys/fs/{nfs,
On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hi Rick, all,
is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0,
or to keep both around indefinately?
I'm talking about:
oldNFS in sys/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver}
John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote ..
On Thursday, March 14, 2013 1:41:04 am Waitman Gobble wrote:
Hi,
I swapped out the CPU on this machine today, I don't recall seeing these
messages
previously:
acpi0: reservation of 0, a (3) failed
acpi0: reservation of 10,
On 3/15/13 8:24 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hi Rick, all,
is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0,
or to keep both around indefinately?
I'm talking about:
On 15 March 2013 09:55, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
Finally, I think it is really premature to declare a sunset for the oldnfs
until the users are gushing with approval over the new system.
The flipside to this argument (and coming from you is kind of amusing
:-) is that without any
On 3/15/13 10:55 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 15 March 2013 09:55, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
Finally, I think it is really premature to declare a sunset for the oldnfs
until the users are gushing with approval over the new system.
The flipside to this argument (and coming from you
On 15 March 2013 11:11, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
People in my org have been working with NFS and reporting issues for the
past year. I'm quite certain that Doug White has reported issues due to
missing certain caching features of the old code.
This is not indicative that newNFS
Isn't the general process (or at least past pattern) to:
- have 1 release cycle with just the old code (aka 8.x with oldNFS)
- have 1 release cycle with old and new code, default to old (aka 9.x
with oldNFS + newNFS)
- have 1 release cycle with old and new code, default to new (aka 10.x
with
On Friday, March 15, 2013 11:24:32 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hi Rick, all,
is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0,
or to keep both around indefinately?
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/15/13 10:55 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 15 March 2013 09:55, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
Finally, I think it is really premature to declare a sunset for the
oldnfs
until the users are gushing with approval over the new system.
The flipside to this
John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, March 15, 2013 11:24:32 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hi Rick, all,
is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD
10.0,
or to keep
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:03 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Friday, March 15, 2013 11:24:32 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hi Rick, all,
is there a plan to decide for one NFS
Freddie Cash wrote:
Isn't the general process (or at least past pattern) to:
- have 1 release cycle with just the old code (aka 8.x with oldNFS)
- have 1 release cycle with old and new code, default to old (aka 9.x
with oldNFS + newNFS)
Actually, your numbering is out by one.
7.x - old only
G'day, All.
First post so please be gentle ;-). Are the barracudas here?
Summary:
Module link-elf will link against static symbols and will fail if the kernel is
not compiled with DDB or the required MODULE_DEPEND has been stripped of local
symbols, see nm -g miibus.ko. I propose that we add
Peter Wemm wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:03 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Friday, March 15, 2013 11:24:32 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
Hi Rick, all,
is there a plan
Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 15.03.2013 15:01, Eggert, Lars wrote:
Hi,
this reminds me that I ran into an issue lately with the new NFS and
locking for NFSv3 mounts on a client that ran -CURRENT and a server
that ran
-STABLE.
When I ran portmaster -a on the client, which mounted
23 matches
Mail list logo
