Hi,
Unfortunately r205821 [1] has caused several regressions to calendar(1).
Relevant PRs:
bin/157718
bin/162211
bin/168785
bin/170930
Some regressions were fixed in summer 2011 but they are still lacking
MFCs.
Is anyone aware of possible problems that reverting calendar(1) to
pre-r205821
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012, Vijay Singh wrote:
All. KASSERT() is a really need way of expressing invariants when INVARIANTS
is defined. However for regular, non-INVARIANTS code folks have the typical
if() panic() combos, or private macros. Would a KVERIFY() that does this in
non-INVARIANTS code make
So I configured a kernel with the following option:
options KTR_ENTRIES=(1024UL*1024)
then booted the kernel and did
$ sysctl debug.ktr.clear=1
and got an insta-reboot.
No panic, nothing, just a reset.
I suspect that the huge static buffer resulting from the above option could be a
cause.
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote:
So I configured a kernel with the following option:
options KTR_ENTRIES=(1024UL*1024)
then booted the kernel and did
$ sysctl debug.ktr.clear=1
and got an insta-reboot.
No panic, nothing, just a reset.
I suspect
On 12/06/2012 09:43, Davide Italiano wrote:
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote:
So I configured a kernel with the following option:
options KTR_ENTRIES=(1024UL*1024)
then booted the kernel and did
$ sysctl debug.ktr.clear=1
and got an insta-reboot.
No
On Wednesday, December 05, 2012 6:51:17 pm Damien Fleuriot wrote:
On 5 Dec 2012, at 18:39, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote:
On Dec 5, 2012, at 9:42 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Tuesday, December 04, 2012 2:41:32 pm Ryan Stone wrote:
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 10:52 AM, John Baldwin
Hi,
The subject line pretty well says it. I am about ready
to commit the NFSv4.1 client patches, but I had better
ask this dump question first.
Is there any architecture where:
uint32_t x[2];
isn't packed? (Or, sizeof(x) != 8, if you prefer.)
As you might have guessed, if the answer is yes, I
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 12:13:24PM +0530, Shrikanth Kamath wrote:
This is regarding the fields in the structure elf_file_t in link_elf.c.
For some kernel modules the symtab field is different from the ddbsymtab
field for some it is the same, would like to know what is the difference
between
Thanks Konstantin, yeah I think there were two levels of strip
happening, one removing the debug sections and another
was removing the .strtab and .symtab. I have EXPORT_SYMS = YES in my
Makefile but that was not helping as the
variables in context are declared static (they are going into the
9 matches
Mail list logo
