6.3-RELEASE versus 5.2-RELEASE

2008-06-09 Thread Joe Kelsey
I think I have finally decoded Jo Rhett's issue. It is very hard to decipher because the poster refuses to exactly identify their problem. The entire problem comes down to the definition of -RELEASE. Jo apparantly feels that they can ONLY run -RELEASE branded code at their workplace. That

Re: 6.3-RELEASE versus 5.2-RELEASE

2008-06-09 Thread Andrew Snow
Joe Kelsey wrote: The entire problem comes down to the definition of -RELEASE. Jo apparantly feels that they can ONLY run -RELEASE branded code at their workplace. That means that they cannot run any form of -STABLE. Interesting, and unfortunate. Empirically, I always felt that the

Re: TMPFS: File System is Full

2008-06-09 Thread Ivan Voras
Lin Jui-Nan Eric wrote: I think there should be a lower bound size limit. Does TMPFS use kernel-space memory? Yes, tmpfs does use kmem and competes with ZFS. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: CLARITY re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy6.3

2008-06-09 Thread John Marshall
Picking one of the many posts from the OP in this thread... On Wed, 04 Jun 2008, 22:33 -0700, Jo Rhett wrote: I am suggesting that given that the current bug list for 6.3-RELEASE is both (a) too large and (b) breaks things that work fine in 6.2 ... that I think pushing 6.2 (the real stable

Re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3

2008-06-09 Thread Ruben van Staveren
On 7 Jun 2008, at 22:54, Max Laier wrote: Here is a cluebat for you: Here is another one: Currently 176 messages, posted by 51 unique participants (25 % by Jo himself) Given the fact that at least these 51 persons are actually reading all the mails, and taking some 5 minutes for it

Re: Current status of support for high end SAN hardware

2008-06-09 Thread Stefan Lambrev
Daniel Ponticello wrote: On FreeBSD7, i'm succesfully using Qlogic 4gb fibre channel HBAs (ISP driver) attached to Fibre Brocade Switch and IBM DS4700 (14 disks array) using 4 way multipath with gmultipath. So far the support in gmultipath is active/passive only? I think in RH5 you can have

[releng_7 tinderbox] failure on powerpc/powerpc

2008-06-09 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2008-06-09 11:19:40 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca TB --- 2008-06-09 11:19:40 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for powerpc/powerpc TB --- 2008-06-09 11:19:40 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2008-06-09 11:19:56 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2008-06-09 11:19:56 -

Re: Current status of support for high end SAN hardware

2008-06-09 Thread Andy Kosela
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Russell Vincent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The FreeBSD support for multipath/SAN is fairly poor. It's fiddly to get to work and boot times are a little variable (into the minutes) as it tries to discover the devices. Once it is configured and booted, it just

[releng_6 tinderbox] failure on i386/i386

2008-06-09 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2008-06-09 11:40:12 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-legacy.sentex.ca TB --- 2008-06-09 11:40:12 - starting RELENG_6 tinderbox run for i386/i386 TB --- 2008-06-09 11:40:12 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2008-06-09 11:40:43 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2008-06-09 11:40:43 -

[releng_6 tinderbox] failure on amd64/amd64

2008-06-09 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2008-06-09 11:22:52 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-legacy.sentex.ca TB --- 2008-06-09 11:22:52 - starting RELENG_6 tinderbox run for amd64/amd64 TB --- 2008-06-09 11:22:52 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2008-06-09 11:23:29 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2008-06-09 11:23:30 -

[releng_7 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64

2008-06-09 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2008-06-09 12:25:44 - tinderbox 2.3 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca TB --- 2008-06-09 12:25:44 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for sparc64/sparc64 TB --- 2008-06-09 12:25:44 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2008-06-09 12:26:02 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2008-06-09 12:26:02 -

Re: Current status of support for high end SAN hardware

2008-06-09 Thread Daniel Ponticello
man gmultipath is your friend ;) MULTIPATH ARCHITECTURE This is an active/passive multiple path architecture with no device knowledge or presumptions other than size matching built in. Therefore the user must exercise some care in selecting providers that do indeed represent

Re: [nvidia | shared irq] umass disconnects [was: panic dd-ing from a USB disk ]

2008-06-09 Thread Paul Schmehl
--On Friday, June 06, 2008 19:36:46 +0200 Arno J. Klaassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can easily produce a similar panic on a dual Opteron 185 with 3G of RAM and running 7-stable-amd64 on a (cheap) nvidia-based MB. It runs gmirror on atapci1 and I attach a geli-encrypted disk via usb. Both

Re: Current status of support for high end SAN hardware

2008-06-09 Thread Wilko Bulte
Quoting Andy Kosela, who wrote on Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 02:41:24PM +0200 .. On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Russell Vincent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The FreeBSD support for multipath/SAN is fairly poor. It's fiddly to get to work and boot times are a little variable (into the minutes) as

Re: cpufreq broken on core2duo

2008-06-09 Thread Kevin Oberman
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 22:30:35 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 10:13:43PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote: Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 09:48:12 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 05:51:38PM

Re: 6.2-STABLE = 7.0-STABLE Upgrade root partition more full

2008-06-09 Thread Gavin Spomer
Skip Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/06/08 1:39 PM Gavin Spomer wrote: I successfully did my first FreeBSD upgrade yesterday after looking at the manual, and cross referencing with Googling and getting help from our network engineer here at CWU. Before the upgrade, running df showed:

Re: 6.3-RELEASE versus 5.2-RELEASE

2008-06-09 Thread Peter Wemm
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 12:19 AM, Joe Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone verify that some number of bugs related to either a) gmirror, b) bge and/or c)twe were fixed after the release of 6.3? That is as far as I can tell the reason that Jo objets to EoL of 6.2, the fact that 6.3 is

BOOTP and no default route

2008-06-09 Thread Robert Blayzor
Is there any way to prevent the BOOTP client from injecting a default route? When I originally set things up our DHCP server would not send a default route because there was no gateway, local only. If you leave out the default route, the server will try proxy-arp when ends up putting a

Environment clearing broken in 7.0

2008-06-09 Thread Timo Sirainen
I think clearing environment using: environ[0] = NULL; has been kind of a semi-standard for a while now. At least Dovecot and Postfix clears their environment this way. But this no longer works in FreeBSD 7.0 (putenv(), environ[0]=NULL, putenv() - everything is visible again). Was this change

New Mailinglist: freebsd-wip-status@

2008-06-09 Thread Max Laier
Hello everybody, SHORT SUMMARY: http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-wip-status Subscribe today!! Tell all your friends, co-workers and everybody you know who's interested in FreeBSD. Post this on your blog! ;) LONG VERSION: if you've been around lately you might already know

Re: CLARITY re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3

2008-06-09 Thread Freddie Cash
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Jo Rhett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jun 8, 2008, at 3:27 PM, Freddie Cash wrote: Like I said, you have to define what you mean by stable and unstable before the discussion can continue. stable can mean many things to many people. You talk about feature

Closing the Jo Rhett argument

2008-06-09 Thread Joe Kelsey
Jo Rhett has clearly stated (in offline reply) that they do not participate in the -BETA and-RC cycles leading up to -RELEASE, so they therefore do not have any issues with -RELEASE and EoL to raise. Actually, they still have the same complaints to raise about EoL, but since they refuse to

Re: pkg_delete core dump when removing linux-tiff

2008-06-09 Thread Jona Joachim
On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 03:57:55PM +0200, Kris Kennaway wrote: Jona Joachim wrote: Hi! pkg_delete core dumps on me when it tries to remove linux-tiff. I can reproduce this reliably. FWIW you can find the core dump here: http://www.hcl-club.lu/~jaj/stuff/pkg_delete.core You need

Re: pkg_delete core dump when removing linux-tiff

2008-06-09 Thread Kris Kennaway
Jona Joachim wrote: On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 03:57:55PM +0200, Kris Kennaway wrote: Jona Joachim wrote: Hi! pkg_delete core dumps on me when it tries to remove linux-tiff. I can reproduce this reliably. FWIW you can find the core dump here: http://www.hcl-club.lu/~jaj/stuff/pkg_delete.core

Re: Closing the Jo Rhett argument

2008-06-09 Thread Jo Rhett
On Jun 9, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Joe Kelsey wrote: Jo Rhett has clearly stated (in offline reply) that they do not participate in the -BETA and-RC cycles leading up to -RELEASE, so they therefore do not have any issues with -RELEASE and EoL to raise. Actually, they still have the same complaints

Re: Environment clearing broken in 7.0

2008-06-09 Thread Sean C. Farley
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008, Timo Sirainen wrote: I think clearing environment using: environ[0] = NULL; has been kind of a semi-standard for a while now. At least Dovecot and Postfix clears their environment this way. But this no longer works in FreeBSD 7.0 (putenv(), environ[0]=NULL, putenv() -

Re: Environment clearing broken in 7.0

2008-06-09 Thread Timo Sirainen
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 22:27 -0500, Sean C. Farley wrote: On Mon, 9 Jun 2008, Timo Sirainen wrote: I think clearing environment using: environ[0] = NULL; has been kind of a semi-standard for a while now. At least Dovecot and Postfix clears their environment this way. But this no