Re: MajorDomo Problems

1999-10-11 Thread Robert Watson
Love to know why my freebsd-arch subscription disappeared, although the rest appeared to stick around. I just resubscribed, but was subscribed before (but not sure about until when) as [EMAIL PROTECTED] What is strange is that if that was bouncing, I would have expected, say, my -current

Re: man reads /etc/rc.conf?

1999-11-12 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 10 Nov 1999, Alexander Leidinger wrote: On 11 Nov, Daniel C. Sobral wrote: (102) netchild@ttyp2 grep cat /etc/rc.conf.local spppconfig_isp0="`cat /etc/isdn/connect.parameters`" ^^^ Calling programs from any of the rc.conf files is considered evil and

Re: man reads /etc/rc.conf?

1999-11-13 Thread Robert Watson
On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Alexander Leidinger wrote: On 12 Nov, Robert Watson wrote: (102) netchild@ttyp2 grep cat /etc/rc.conf.local spppconfig_isp0="`cat /etc/isdn/connect.parameters`" ^^^ Calling programs from any of the rc.conf files is consi

Re: FreeBSD security auditing project.

1999-11-29 Thread Robert Watson
. Not to interrupt in the middle of this discussion but you might want to check with robert watson before you guys get too deep here since he is working on a FUNDED Posix.1e implementation for FreeBSD. And has already posted some EARLY MAC code. It might be usefull to work with him as well. Just a thought

Re: fsck / and remount failure

2002-10-27 Thread Robert Watson
Are you using UFS1 extended attributes on that box? I suspect there might be a bug involving the open flags passed to extended attribute backing vnodes such that a remount is refused because there are existing vnodes opened writable. I.e., the extended attribute backing files are opened

Re: Kernel breakage?

2002-10-27 Thread Robert Watson
I think UPDATING hasn't been updated on this, but there was a change in the format printing for printf that conflicts with the ddb format printing. You need to rebuild your gcc. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Associates

Re: Poor 5.0/nfs performance

2002-10-29 Thread Robert Watson
Hmm. I haven't experienced this with my 5.0 boxes not running WITNESS/INVARIANTS/etc, but I'm updating a box to give it a try. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Associates Laboratories On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, John De Boskey wrote:

Re: fsck / and remount failure

2002-11-01 Thread Robert Watson
On Sun, 27 Oct 2002, Sean Kelly wrote: On Sun, Oct 27, 2002 at 05:17:44PM -0500, Robert Watson wrote: Are you using UFS1 extended attributes on that box? Yes. (290) smkelly@edgemaster:~$ grep UFS /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/EDGEMASTER options UFS_DIRHASH options UFS_EXTATTR

Re: ypbind doesn't work right on freshly installed machines

2002-11-01 Thread Robert Watson
Per our discussion out-of-band, and just for the reference of others who might have the same question, forced dependencies for rpcbind from ypserv and ypbind aren't present right now, you can work around by explicitly enabling rpcbind in rc.conf. You might actually see rpcbind running later in

Re: libc size

2002-11-03 Thread Robert Watson
On Sun, 3 Nov 2002, Miguel Mendez wrote: 2) Security. Can LD_LIBRARY_PATH (or other mechanisms) be used to deliberately subvert any of these programs? (especially the handful of suid/sgid programs here) .. I can't come up right now with an idea of how exploiting

Re: libc size

2002-11-03 Thread Robert Watson
On Sun, 3 Nov 2002, Robert Watson wrote: On Sun, 3 Nov 2002, Miguel Mendez wrote: 2) Security. Can LD_LIBRARY_PATH (or other mechanisms) be used to deliberately subvert any of these programs? (especially the handful of suid/sgid programs here) .. I can't come up right

Re: setfacl requirements?

2002-11-08 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Dan Pelleg wrote: I'm trying to use setfacl - just the example that's in the manpage. All I ever get is: setfacl: acl_get_file() failed: Operation not supported This error generally results from three cases: (1) UFS_ACL isn't enabled (2) Extended attributes aren't

Re: /dev/acd*t* no longer available in -current?

2002-11-15 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Sheldon Hearn wrote: On (2002/11/15 09:48), Soeren Schmidt wrote: Don't you think it makes more sense for the kernel to start off with more restrictive permissions, and have the administrator determine whether more restrictive permissions are appropriate?

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, John Baldwin wrote: On 15-Nov-2002 Wesley Morgan wrote: On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Vallo Kallaste wrote: Just finished '-j2 buildworld' and it did well with kernel which had the options enabled. Therefore I suppose that those options are still absolutely necessary to

Re: SMP stability ? [was Re: more info from panic from running dnet on SMP kernel]

2002-11-17 Thread Robert Watson
On Sun, 17 Nov 2002, Thierry Herbelot wrote: Even make -j1 buildworld with the SMP kernel ends with a complete freeze of the machine (the kernel does not go to a panic where I could try a backtrace) I've seen several reports that using a serial break to get into ddb is now quite a bit more

Re: Processes hanging in thrd_sleep

2002-11-17 Thread Robert Watson
I ran into that during heavy builds on one of my boxes a few months ago -- I never really got around to properly debugging it because the UFS file systems promptly ate themselves. Oddly, I had two boxes in particular that this happened on, and none of my others, and it wasn't clear to me if there

Re: more info from panic from running dnet on SMP kernel ( lock order reversal, recursed on non-recursive lock )

2002-11-17 Thread Robert Watson
Hmm. It looks like there is indeed a lock leak in the RFTHREAD code. Maybe a change like the following might help: PROC_LOCK(p2); psignal(p2, SIGKILL); PROC_UNLOCK(p2); } Change the } to: }

Re: Device permissions with DEVFS

2002-11-19 Thread Robert Watson
On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Bruce Evans wrote: No, the default permissions are specified in the driver source code via make_dev(). The drivers only get the magic numbers for uids and gids from a central file. This is bad enough. I think all devices should have ownership root:wheel and mode

Re: Device permissions with DEVFS

2002-11-19 Thread Robert Watson
On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robe rt Watson writes: No, the default permissions are specified in the driver source code via make_dev(). The drivers only get the magic numbers for uids and gids from a central file. This is bad

Re: panic: sleeping thread owns a mutex - with debug traceback

2002-11-20 Thread Robert Watson
Hmm. Another thread has decided to sleep while holding an inpcb mutex. Any chance this can be reproduced while running WITNESS? If so, you should get a panic earlier when the other thread sleeps in the first place. The easiest way to do that is if you can reproduce the panic with WITNESS. If

Re: panic: sleeping thread owns a mutex - with debug traceback

2002-11-20 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Robert Watson wrote: Hmm. Another thread has decided to sleep while holding an inpcb mutex. Any chance this can be reproduced while running WITNESS? If so, you should get a panic earlier when the other thread sleeps in the first place. The easiest way to do

Re: DP2 (I think!) crash booting from floppies

2002-11-20 Thread Robert Watson
This is not actually DP2, it's about a week earlier. That said, I'm not sure that bug was fixed in the missing week. If you can, try booting off of the 5.0-DP2 ISOs found at: ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ISO-IMAGES-i386/5.0-DP2 Or using the floppies:

Re: your mail

2002-11-20 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Chris Howells wrote: Hi, On Wednesday 20 November 2002 5:08 pm, Robert Watson wrote: dmesg is a command that dumps the kernel message buffer. You can redirect the output to a file: dmesg fileofchoice Sure. This bit is sufficiently similar

Re: panic: sleeping thread owns a mutex - with debug traceback

2002-11-20 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, John Baldwin wrote: Erm. Did you manage to look at dmesg then? If so, you would have seen warnings from WITNESS earlier about the locks messing up. If you can reproduce this and are letting it sit unattended, a better plan might be to turn on witness_ddb (it's a

Searching for users of netncp and nwfs to help debug 5.0 problems

2002-11-21 Thread Robert Watson
The build of netncp is currently broken on 5.0-CURRENT, and I'd like to see this fixed before 5.0-RELEASE. Unfortunately, we're having a lot of trouble finding a test environment, which is the natural and immediate follow-on to the compile fixes :-). Was wondering if anyone with FreeBSD kernel

Re: Searching for users of netncp and nwfs to help debug 5.0 problems

2002-11-21 Thread Robert Watson
On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, Robert Watson wrote: The build of netncp is currently broken on 5.0-CURRENT, and I'd like to see this fixed before 5.0-RELEASE. Unfortunately, we're having a lot of trouble finding a test environment, which is the natural and immediate follow-on to the compile fixes

Re: Searching for users of netncp and nwfs to help debug 5.0 problems

2002-11-21 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Brad Knowles wrote: At 5:23 PM -0500 2002/11/21, Robert Watson wrote: (And, you have to bring your own test environment, as the second sentence suggests, but doesn't actually state). Over on -chat, we're in the process of putting together a list

Re: smbfs install option questions

2002-11-21 Thread Robert Watson
In terms of where to take this: there are many reported problems with smbfs on 5.0-CURRENT. It's not clear whether this is left over from the KSE imports, the Apple-derived fixes that might not have fixed things, etc. In any case, before we can look at smbfs install, we really need smbfs

Re: VM locking problem... And doscmd(8)

2002-11-21 Thread Robert Watson
On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, Juli Mallett wrote: I'm getting a giant owned assertion failure in the vm_map code, simply by running doscmd something.exe where something.exe is a self-extracting ZIP file (of BIOS upgrade stuff, FWIW), which leads trivially to tripping over it. I still don't have a

Re: DP2 root partition size

2002-11-21 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Richard Tobin wrote: Somewhere there should be a warning that the root partition needs to be *much* bigger in 5.0 than in 4.x. It's gone from 40-something MB to 92 MB for a default install. It's really frustrating to install a system and find that / is 104% full.

Re: Searching for users of netncp and nwfs to help debug 5.0 problems

2002-11-22 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Brad Knowles wrote: If I might suggest: there's a freebsd-qa mailing list. It's a great place to organize QA efforts, whereas freebsd-chat is notorious for its lack of signal (it's where dead signals go to rot). There's been some talk of freebsd-qa, but so

Re: No entries in /proc :: feature or problem ??

2002-11-22 Thread Robert Watson
On 22 Nov 2002, Dhee Reddy wrote: Just tried to look up some info and saw that the /proc filesystem doesn't contain any files. Shouldn't they contain entries correcponding to all the processes ? truely -- dhee In fresh 5.0 installs, procfs is not enabled by default. Right

Re: Searching for users of netncp and nwfs to help debug 5.0 problems

2002-11-22 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Martijn Pronk wrote: The build of netncp is currently broken on 5.0-CURRENT, and I'd like to see this fixed before 5.0-RELEASE. Unfortunately, we're having a lot of trouble finding a test environment, which is the natural and immediate follow-on to the compile fixes :-).

Re: libpthread question

2002-11-22 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, walt wrote: I noticed David Xu's changes to libpthread this morning, so I did a make libraries and noticed with surprise that libpthread.so.5 was still dated Sep 16. I then did 'cd /usr/src/lib' and a 'make' and noticed that libpthread did not show up during the make.

Re: mbuf header bloat ?

2002-11-22 Thread Robert Watson
On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, Luigi Rizzo wrote: [Bcc to -net because it is relevant there. This email has been triggered by a private discussion i was having with other committers (who will easily recognise themselves :) which suggested the possibility of adding more fields to mbuf headers] Just

Re: No entries in /proc :: feature or problem ??

2002-11-22 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Mike Barcroft wrote: Dhee Reddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello all. Just tried to look up some info and saw that the /proc filesystem doesn't contain any files. Shouldn't they contain entries correcponding to all the processes ? truely This

Keeping mdmfs in sync with newfs

2002-11-22 Thread Robert Watson
Dima, I recently switched two of my diskless crash boxes over to rc.d from the old rc scripts, and discovered that the new rc.diskless code uses mdmfs. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear to support UFS2, since the newfs -O flag isn't supported -- and it isn't quite so simple to add, since mdmfs

Re: libpthread question

2002-11-22 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Juli Mallett wrote: This is expected behavior -- libpthread is currently disconnected from the build. I'd actually like to see it connected to the build, with an appropriate WARNING: DRAGONS INCLUDED man page also hooked up to discourage accidental use. At least,

RE: DP2: nfsiod

2002-11-22 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, John Baldwin wrote: On 22-Nov-2002 local.freebsd.current wrote: Having installed DP2 and said NO to NFS client and server in sysinstall (and there's nothing about them in /etc/rc.conf) I see four nfsiod daemons running after the first boot. Are they supposed to be

Re: Panic, possibly MAC related

2002-11-23 Thread Robert Watson
On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Christian Brueffer wrote: just got this panic on my notebook. Had to manually shut it down after a acpiconf -s 4. At the next bootup, the panic occured. At the moment I'm trying to boot into my system again to reproduce it. In general, this panic occurs in the

Re: ACPI problem

2002-11-23 Thread Robert Watson
On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Ertan Kucukoglu wrote: First of all, I do not know much about backtracing, debugging etc. First advice: we shipped DP2 with two different kernels, the normal kernel without high debugging features, and then a special debugging kernel called DEBUG. My first advice when

Re: -current unusable after a crash

2002-11-25 Thread Robert Watson
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Mikhail Teterin wrote: The only way to get my -current system back to normal after a crash is to boot into single user and do an explicit ``fsck -p''. Otherwise the system will, seemingly, boot fine, but none of the ttyvs will accept any input, although tty-switching

Re: [Where] is OpenOffice 1.0.1_4 package available?

2002-11-25 Thread Robert Watson
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Munish Chopra wrote: On 2002-11-25 08:30 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://projects.imp.ch/openoffice/ But, i tried to install that package on my FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT, well it went fine, but when i try to run openoffice, i will get a Segmentation fault.

Re: mbuf header bloat ?

2002-11-25 Thread Robert Watson
On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Andrew Gallatin wrote: I propose that we make struct label portion of the pkthdr compile-time conditional on MAC. The assumption is that you will move the MAC label to an m_tag sometime after 5.0-RELEASE. This weekend I spent about six hours looking at what it would

Re: mbuf header bloat ?

2002-11-25 Thread Robert Watson
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Bosko Milekic wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:31:39AM -0500, Robert Watson wrote: BTW, do you have any recent large-scale measurements of packet size distribution? In local tests and measurements, the additional 20 bytes on i386 didn't bump the remaining mbuf data

Re: mbuf header bloat ?

2002-11-25 Thread Robert Watson
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Sam Leffler wrote: As I explained to you; the handling of mtags mimics what was there for the aux mbufs. I did this intentionally to avoid changes that might introduce subtle problems. My intent was to cleanup this stuff after 5.0 releases by replacing the pkthdr copy

Re: mbuf header bloat ?

2002-11-25 Thread Robert Watson
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Sam Leffler wrote: I don't see this problem; m_getcl appears to do the right thing. Hmm. I see the SLIST initialization there also. Maybe I'm thinking of another function, I'll have to go check. Sorry about that. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team,

Re: ACLs on the boot partition?

2002-11-26 Thread Robert Watson
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Hiten Pandya wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:21:28AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote the words in effect of: On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Bruno Miguel wrote: On 25 Nov 2002 at 23:34, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote... How

Re: 5.0-DP2 ACLs on UFS2

2002-11-26 Thread Robert Watson
. I proceeded to try getfacl and setfacl. getfacl returned the default settings (just stat() in ACL form according to Robert Watson), however, no matter what I tried all I could get with setfacl -m g:mail:rwx testfile was: setfacl: acl_get_file() failed: Operation not supported I thought

Re: mbuf header bloat ?

2002-11-27 Thread Robert Watson
Andrew, Thanks for your patience as I finished some research and experimentation regarding the options there. Some more details below. On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Andrew Gallatin wrote: On the contrary, I think that if anything is going to be done, it must be done now, so as to not break binary

Re: ACLs on the boot partition?

2002-11-27 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Bruce Evans wrote: On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Robert Watson wrote: tunefs changes the flag for the next mount, so doesn't take immediate effect. Once you've tunefs'd a read-only file system, you need to unmount and remount it -- for the file system root, this generally

Re: ACLs on the boot partition?

2002-11-27 Thread Robert Watson
On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, Bruce Evans wrote: On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Robert Watson wrote: On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Bruce Evans wrote: On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Robert Watson wrote: tunefs changes the flag for the next mount, so doesn't take immediate effect. Once you've tunefs'd a read-only

Re: mbuf header bloat ?

2002-11-27 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Robert Watson wrote: I'd like to continue to explore options for reducing the number of memory allocations to extend storage on mbufs. One idea I've been tossing around is adopting Jeff Roberson's extension model used

Re: system locks with vnode backed md(4)

2002-11-30 Thread Robert Watson
On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, Michal Mertl wrote: I'm now unable to make it dead-lock again. Yet it happened quite easily. I had more md backing files in the same directory at the beginning (to test Terry's suspicion mentioned in thread 'jail' on hackers@). I've noticed that chroot() environments

Re: [REPORT] Upgrade from 4.0-RELEASE to 5.0-CURRENT

2002-12-01 Thread Robert Watson
On Sun, 1 Dec 2002, Jake Burkholder wrote: Apparently, On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 01:15:00PM -0200, Daniel C. Sobral said words to the effect of; There I go reply to all... sigh IIRC, we never supported upgrade to 4.0 or 4.1 from anybut but the *latest* version in the 3.x series.

Re: The great perl script rewrite - progress report

2002-12-01 Thread Robert Watson
Base system perl-based tools added to the TODO list. We need to deal with these ASAP. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Associates Laboratories On Sun, 1 Dec 2002, Kris Kennaway wrote: On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 10:41:28PM -0500,

Re: setfacl requirements?

2002-12-05 Thread Robert Watson
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, kai ouyang wrote: Hi, everybody, From Robert N M Watson (1) UFS_ACL isn't enabled Yes, I am sure that in my kernel config: options UFS_ACL options UFS_EXTATTR options UFS_EXTATTR_AUTOSTART Ok, looks good. (2) Extended attributes aren't available on the file system

Re: LOR: filedesc structure - pipe mutex

2002-12-06 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Kris Kennaway wrote: I'm getting this too: Local package initialization:lock order reversal 1st 0xc449ad34 filedesc structure (filedesc structure) @ /local0/src-client/sys/kern/sys_generic.c:901 2nd 0xc4146780 pipe mutex (pipe mutex) @

Re: LOR: filedesc structure - pipe mutex

2002-12-07 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Kris Kennaway wrote: On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 07:18:03PM -0800, Lars Eggert wrote: I'm getting this too: After discussing this with various people on IRC, it was determined that this is not the place where the reversal is occurring, but since witness doesn't have the

Re: backgroud fsck is still locking up system (fwd)

2002-12-07 Thread Robert Watson
On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Bruce Evans wrote: On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Archie Cobbs wrote: So in summary my recommendation is to add a big warning to the growfs(1) man page that is should not be run on the root partition, even if you have booted single-user mode and haven't mounted / yet. I.e.,

Re: LOR: filedesc structure - pipe mutex

2002-12-07 Thread Robert Watson
BTW, one upshot of this whole event is that we should probably be hard-coding the lock order of all important locks rather than allowing it to be automatically determined. We'd uncover problems of this sort much faster and much more easily, and it would provide better documentation of the

if_fxp and pause packets (or, I didn't need the network anyway)

2002-12-11 Thread Robert Watson
I'm having a recurring problem on a number of machines wherein the fxp interfaces on those machines will spew out pause packets in vast quantities while the system is in ddb, or following a shutdown. This doesn't happen with other operating systems, and only started happening at some point in

Re: revoke(2) redux...

2002-12-24 Thread Robert Watson
On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: Isn't there a pretty obvious race between the revoke() and the open() ? Wouldn't it in fact make much more sense if revoke(2) was defined as int revoke(int fd); /* kick everybody else off */ and the code above would look like:

Re: i386 tinderbox failure

2002-12-27 Thread Robert Watson
On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Bruce Evans wrote: /local0/scratch/des/src/sys/fs/devfs/devfs_vnops.c:932: (near initialization for `devfs_specop_entries[14]') *** Error code 1 This was broken by removing a unsed definition in: % RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/kern/vnode_if.src,v % Working file:

Re: Problem with /dev/stdout in a chroot environment.

2002-12-30 Thread Robert Watson
On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, Marc Butler wrote: I'm currently trying to build CURRENT (DEC 29 2002) within a chroot environment under CURRENT (DEC 17 2002). Presently I am stuck on an error which appears to be related to /dev/stdout in a chroot environment (devfs?). Could you provide a bit more

pthread ^T problem on recent -CURRENT: death in libc_r mutex

2003-01-04 Thread Robert Watson
Juli Mallett pointed me at the following reproduceable problem on my -current notebook with userland/kernel dated Dec 29: paprika:~/freebsd/test/pthread ./test 1 2 1 2 1 2 load: 0.02 cmd: test 910 [running] 0.00u 0.01s 0% 824k 1 Bus error (core dumped) paprika:~/freebsd/test/pthread ./test 1 2

Re: pthread ^T problem on recent -CURRENT: death in libc_r mutex

2003-01-04 Thread Robert Watson
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Juli Mallett wrote: * De: Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-01-04 ] [ Subjecte: pthread ^T problem on recent -CURRENT: death in libc_r mutex ] Juli Mallett pointed me at the following reproduceable problem on my -current notebook with userland/kernel

Re: pthread ^T problem on recent -CURRENT: death in libc_r mutex

2003-01-05 Thread Robert Watson
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Juli Mallett wrote: * De: Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-01-04 ] [ Subjecte: pthread ^T problem on recent -CURRENT: death in libc_r mutex ] Juli Mallett pointed me at the following reproduceable problem on my -current notebook with userland/kernel

gdb: failed to set signal flags properly for ast()

2003-01-05 Thread Robert Watson
While debugging the recent pthreads problem, I've started running into this: pid 663 (test), uid 1000: exited on signal 10 (core dumped) failed to set signal flags properly for ast() failed to set signal flags properly for ast() failed to set signal flags properly for ast() failed to set signal

Re: pthread ^T problem on recent -CURRENT: death in libc_r mutex

2003-01-05 Thread Robert Watson
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Julian Elischer wrote: On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Robert Watson wrote: Updating to Jan 4 kernel generates the same failure mode for me: following What makes you think it's the kernel? Well, to be more precise, I upgraded the entire system to Jan 4. I'm assuming it's

Re: alpha tinderbox failure

2003-01-06 Thread Robert Watson
On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Mike Barcroft wrote: These new truncated lines only make problems harder to solve. Anyway, the problem is the 5th argument to vn_extattr_get() should be an int *, but it's passing a size_t *. It looks like most consumers of vn_extattr_get() would prefer a size_t *, so

Re: bridging broken in -current AND -stable

2000-03-08 Thread Robert Watson
On Thu, 9 Mar 2000, Boris Staeblow wrote: On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 11:15:23PM +0100, Luigi Rizzo wrote: Is it possible that bridging is broken in -current and -stable? no, but the "de" driver on bridging is now unsupported and i could not find the time to make it work after

tcpdump IPv4 warning (gratuitous)

2000-03-08 Thread Robert Watson
Just a quicky. Since we now support IPv6 by default, you can imagine environments where you have an interface and IPv4 is not in use. My tcpdump is from a rather elderly 4.0, so this may be fixed already, but: # tcpdump -eni bridge0 tcpdump: WARNING: bridge0: no IPv4 address assigned

problems using pccard 3c589c with 4.0-snap install

2000-03-14 Thread Robert Watson
Yesterday I spent a fair amount of time attempting to get a 4.0 snapshot to install on my notebook (Dell Latitude CPi), which until now has been happily running 3.3-PAO. Sadly, it seems not to like my ethernet card. When installing, sysinstall provides three IRQ exclude options before

current.freebsd.org snapshots and broken X11

2000-03-14 Thread Robert Watson
It looks like the X11 associated with the snapshots on current.freebsd.org is still broken: /usr/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Share object "libXThrStub.so.6" not found Installing -current boxes for testing and development would be a lot easier if this worked. :-) Especially leading up to releases

Re: current.freebsd.org snapshots and broken X11

2000-03-14 Thread Robert Watson
Sounds good to me, as long as it runs :-). BTW, ran into another nit from the 02/13 snapshot. I installed the X-kern-developer distribution, discovered X11 didn't work, so went back into sysinstall to install X11 stuff. I selected some combination of X11 components, and chose

Re: problems using pccard 3c589c with 4.0-snap install

2000-03-14 Thread Robert Watson
, ``Which of these IRQs should I note use'', instead, ``Which should I use''. Or the like. On Tue, 14 Mar 2000, Robert Watson wrote: Yesterday I spent a fair amount of time attempting to get a 4.0 snapshot to install on my notebook (Dell Latitude CPi), which until now has been happily running 3.3

Comments on 4.0-RELEASE install glitches

2000-03-18 Thread Robert Watson
I installed 4.0 on a notebook yesterday, using the docking station. As previously described, I had hardware probing problems without using the ethernet card in the docking station. Well, sadly, X11 requires an extra option or two to work when with the docking station, but I figured that out

panic: vm_map_entry_create: kernel resources exhausted

2000-04-10 Thread Robert Watson
5.0-CURRENT -- was doing a make buildworld -j 2. Sadly, I don't know what exact date the source was from, as I had just cvsup'd and started building, but I expect in the last week and a half. I was running with capabilities patches going, but I wouldn't imagine that it would cause this

middle mouse button emulation broken in 4.0-STABLE?

2000-04-14 Thread Robert Watson
Not sure if this should go to -current or -stable, since we seem to get a lot of instant MFC's these days :-). I upgraded a notebook from 4.0-RELEASE to -STABLE last night. After doing so, I noticed that the middle mouse button emulation in moused seems to be fairly broken -- i.e., once it's

Re: Failed compile of ext2_alloc.c

2000-04-15 Thread Robert Watson
Yup -- I neglected to update the ext2fs code (which uses UFS stuff) to include the requisite include files. Please try the attached patch against src/sys/gnu/ext2fs, and let me know if it works, and I'll go ahead and commit it. I caught the weird Coda dependancy, but guess I missed this one.

Re: Failed compile of ext2_alloc.c

2000-04-15 Thread Robert Watson
Since it appears to work for me, I'm going to go ahead and commit the patch before too many other people run into this. Please let me know if you have further problems and I'll get them fixed up ASAP. On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, George W. Dinolt wrote: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Recent commit changes extattr backing file format, users beware

2000-04-19 Thread Robert Watson
I just committed a change to the extended attribute backing code that modifies the per-attribute header. The result is that backing files used and created from now on have a different format, and weird and unfortunate things will happen with backing files before this change. I doubt anyone is

Re: Recent commit changes extattr backing file format, users beware

2000-04-19 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 19 Apr 2000, Garance A Drosihn wrote: At 3:41 AM -0400 4/19/00, Robert Watson wrote: I hope not to change the format any further. I've been considering introducing a backing file header version number of some sort, but this is only necessary if we think the backing file format

Re: Recent commit changes extattr backing file format, users beware

2000-04-19 Thread Robert Watson
FYI: I committed the addition of the magic number and version information an hour or two ago. It seems to work fine for me, but please let me know if you have any problems. A migration tool doesn't seem useful yet, but is now feasible :-). In a day or two, I'll send a post to freebsd-fs

Re: What happens with SECURELVL? (init complains)

2000-06-07 Thread Robert Watson
At bde's request, I moved kern.suser_permitted to kern_prot.c and accidentally also trimmed kern.securelevel. I just committed it back into kern_mib.c. Please let me know if there are further problems. That said, I'm a little puzzled as to where securelevel is being defined -- a bunch of

Re: What happens with SECURELVL? (init complains)

2000-06-07 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 7 Jun 2000, Robert Watson wrote: That said, I'm a little puzzled as to where securelevel is being defined -- a bunch of stuff depends on the variable and yet my test build succeeded without it in there. And you go that far also -- far enough to boot rather than have the linking fail

Re: KAME integration and plans

2000-07-05 Thread Robert Watson
This is great news -- one of the big hangups in our interop testing at NAI Labs was the like of IKE on FreeBSD. I notice that right now racoon is a port -- assuming this interpretation is correct, are their any plans to integrate racoon as a base system component? As you point out, without

Re: /sys hierarchy

2000-07-05 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 5 Jul 2000, John Baldwin wrote: The headers will always be installed in the right place in /usr/include: Makefile's are editable. As far as kernel compiles, symlinks can be created in the work directory as one possible solution. For example, sys/compile/i386/GENERIC/netinet -

Re: 5.1-R acl problem (again)

2003-08-14 Thread Robert Watson
On Sun, 10 Aug 2003, Branko F. Gracnar wrote: Thanks for quick and very informative answer. You're right about getfacl -d (i used linux + acl patch before, where default acls are displayed without any arguments and i didn't read getfacl man page). Yeah -- the Linux tool implementation

Re: Change in application of default ACLs in UFS

2003-08-14 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003, Daniel C. Sobral wrote: Note: this change contains a semantic bugfix for new file creation: we now intersect the ACL-generated mode and the cmode requested by the user process. This means permissions on newly created file objects will now be more

5.2-RELEASE TODO

2003-08-15 Thread Robert Watson
, in | | | | | which the ACL_MASK | | | | | entry overrides the | | ACL_MASK override | In | | umask, rather than | | of umask support in | progress | Robert Watson | being intersected | | UFS

Re: LOR with filedesc structure and Giant

2003-08-15 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Kris Kennaway wrote: The problem seems to be due to select() being called on the /dev/null device, and it is holding the filedesc lock when it reaches PICKUP_GIANT() in spec_poll. Yeah, this is pretty much the same issue you've been bumping into for a bit -- we hold

Re: LOR with filedesc structure and Giant

2003-08-16 Thread Robert Watson
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: The problem seems to be due to select() being called on the /dev/null device, and it is holding the filedesc lock when it reaches PICKUP_GIANT() in spec_poll. Yeah, this is pretty much the same issue you've been bumping into for a bit -- we

Re: HEADS UP: dynamic root support now in the tree

2003-08-17 Thread Robert Watson
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003, Shin-ichi Yoshimoto wrote: make installworld broken. ==libexex/rtld-elf [snip] ln: /usr/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Operation not permitted *** Error code 1 any idea ? I'm guessing we need to remove the schg flag from the old ld-elf.so.1 before trying to replace it with

Re: Broken kernel compile on 5.1-RELEASE / 5-CURRENT (SMP, PAE scsi)

2003-08-19 Thread Robert Watson
On Tue, 19 Aug 2003, Mark Sergeant wrote: There are no other errors apart from those listed so I may try compiling as a module that gets loaded on boot. Just one problem, I succesfully build an SMP kernel without PAE and then rebooted and the server is no longer responding, it seems it

Re: mksnap_ffs, snapshot issues, again

2003-08-19 Thread Robert Watson
On Tue, 19 Aug 2003, Branko F. Gracnar wrote: The behaviour of filesystem activity stalling during snapshot creation is intentional, but 30 minutes to snapshot an empty FS is not. Is there disk activity during this time? It's not clear from your mail whether bg fsck is in operation during

Re: 5.1-R: zero byte core file.

2003-08-20 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, Yogeshwar Shenoy wrote: While using 5.1-RELEASE, I find that if my application program seg faults, it produces programname.core; but it is 0 bytes. I ran the exact same program on another machine that was running 4.4-RELEASE, and I do get a core file that I can use with

Re: sysinstall spec_getpages panic (with VM overtones)

2003-08-20 Thread Robert Watson
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, Gavin Atkinson wrote: On the 8th August [EMAIL PROTECTED] mentioned he was getting a panic with FreeBSD inside VMware where _mtx_lock is being called with a NULL mutex from spec_getpages. I'm also seeing this, 100% reproducible, on real hardware. (see message ID [EMAIL

Re: malloc message with nfs transfer

2003-08-21 Thread Robert Watson
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, cosmin wrote: malloc() of 64 with the following non-sleepable locks held: exclusive sleep mutex inpr = 0 (0xcef0) locked @ /usr/src/sys/netinet/udp_usrreq.c:378 exclusive sleep mutex netisr lock r = 0 (0xc061be80) locked @ /usr/src/sys/net/netisr.c:215 I'm

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >