On 27 Jan, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 12:19:16PM -0500, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 00:31:30 -0800 (PST)
>> Don Lewis wrote:
>> > If I create a simple test program that calls malloc() and set a
>> > breakpoint in malloc(), the breakpoint gets set in th
On 27 Jan, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 10:47:20 -0800 (PST)
> Don Lewis wrote:
>
>> On 27 Jan, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
>> > On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 00:31:30 -0800 (PST)
>> > Don Lewis wrote:
>>
>> >> If I create a simple test program that calls malloc() and set a
>> >> breakpoin
Hello,
Please take a look SVN r309933:
r309933 | hrs | 2016-12-12 22:33:40 +0300 (Mon, 12 Dec 2016) | 13 lines
- Refactor listening socket list. All of the listening sockets are
now maintained in a single linked-list in a
Hi,
Alex Deiter wrote
in :
al> Hello,
al>
al> Please take a look SVN r309933:
(snip)
al> Successfully tested on IPv4-only CURRENT r312856M.
Thank you for your report. r312921 should fix this problem. Please
let me know if you still find something wrong with the latest
version.
-- Hiro
On 28/1/17 4:16 am, Ngie Cooper wrote:
On Jan 27, 2017, at 09:05, Warner Losh wrote:
...
I'm curious why you can't find the space for a bigger partition?
Almost all drives these days are partitioned with a little wasted
space, and that wasted space should be more than enough to cover us
here.
On 28/1/17 1:35 am, Allan Jude wrote:
On 2017-01-27 12:33, Shawn Webb wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 12:30:17PM -0500, Allan Jude wrote:
On 2017-01-27 12:05, Warner Losh wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Toomas Soome wrote:
On 27. jaan 2017, at 1:40, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya)
wrote:
On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 6:43 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 28/1/17 4:16 am, Ngie Cooper wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jan 27, 2017, at 09:05, Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> I'm curious why you can't find the space for a bigger partition?
>>> Almost all drives these days are partitioned with a little w
> On 28. jaan 2017, at 18:56, Warner Losh wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> at $JOB we are just testing a script that expands the root zfs partition on
>> in-field appliances by shaving a bit off swap and cannibalising a small data
>> partition we don't really use. I see we only left 64K for the boot part.
>>
On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
...
> So? It literally doesn't matter where the freebsd-boot partition
> lives, or what it's number is. You can put it at the start or end of
> the swap partition after adjusting its size. I've done this on several
> systems... NanoBSD plays g
On 2017-01-28 13:56, Ngie Cooper wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> So? It literally doesn't matter where the freebsd-boot partition
>> lives, or what it's number is. You can put it at the start or end of
>> the swap partition after adjusting its size. I've
On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Allan Jude wrote:
> On 2017-01-28 13:56, Ngie Cooper wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> So? It literally doesn't matter where the freebsd-boot partition
>>> lives, or what it's number is. You can put it at the start or
On 2017-01-28 14:04, Ngie Cooper wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Allan Jude wrote:
>> On 2017-01-28 13:56, Ngie Cooper wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
So? It literally doesn't matter where the freebsd-boot partition
lives, or wha
> What created a partition that small?
Me.
gpart up until last summer said that users should create 44kB
freebsd-boot partitions -- des@ corrected that in r303289:
-This example uses 88 blocks (44 kB) so the next partition will be
-aligned on a 64 kB boundary without the need to specify an expli
On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Ngie Cooper wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Allan Jude wrote:
>> On 2017-01-28 13:56, Ngie Cooper wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
So? It literally doesn't matter where the freebsd-boot partition
On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Ngie Cooper wrote:
>> What created a partition that small?
>
> Me.
>
> gpart up until last summer said that users should create 44kB
> freebsd-boot partitions -- des@ corrected that in r303289:
>
> -This example uses 88 blocks (44 kB) so the next partition will be
On 2017-01-28 15:17, Ngie Cooper wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Ngie Cooper wrote:
>>> What created a partition that small?
>>
>> Me.
>>
>> gpart up until last summer said that users should create 44kB
>> freebsd-boot partitions -- des@ corrected that in r303289:
>>
>> -This example us
On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Allan Jude wrote:
...
> The 'zfsboot' version, is dd's into the zfs boot code area. It is read
> by the assembly code there. It is important the file be the size that
> will be read, so it is padded out. That file is currently only used for
> MBR booting from ZF
On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Ngie Cooper wrote:
...
> After some creative hacking... tada!
>
> # find /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/boot/ -type f -name \*zfsboot -exec ls -l {} \;
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 131584 Jan 28 12:07
> /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/boot/i386/zfsboot/zfsboot
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root w
On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Ngie Cooper wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Ngie Cooper wrote:
> ...
>
>> After some creative hacking... tada!
>>
>> # find /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/boot/ -type f -name \*zfsboot -exec ls -l {} \;
>> -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 131584 Jan 28 12:07
>> /usr/ob
Hi All,
I've created my base repo and installed the OS from packages.
All in all it all went rather smooth!
As for pkg it seems to not pay attention to base library subdirs:
-
# pkg check -Ba
Checking all packages: 3%
(FreeBSD-kernel-sm-12.0.s20170128125723) /boot/kernel/kernel - required
Hello,
The most recent CURRENT [r312928] with enabled kernel option TCP_RFC7413 panics
spontaneously:
Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode
cpuid = 1; apic id = 02
fault virtual address = 0x28
fault code = supervisor read data, page not present
instruction pointer = 0
21 matches
Mail list logo