on 23/05/2009 05:26 Alexander Motin said the following:
Hi.
Joe Karthauser wrote:
I spoke too soon. It must have just randomly booted, because it is now
hanging again. No amount of jiggling cables has made any difference.
Can you provide verbose boot messages of your system from the
On Sat, 30 May 2009 21:41:36 +0300 Dan Naumov dan.nau...@gmail.com wrote
about ZFS NAS configuration question:
DN So, this leaves me with 1 SATA port used for a FreeBSD disk and 4 SATA
DN ports available for tinketing with ZFS.
Do you have a USB port available to boot from? A conventional USB
On 1 Jun 2009, at 11:22, Henri Hennebert wrote:
Hello,
During my tests (succesful) to directly boot from ZFS (with zfsboot
and gptzfsboot) I encounter the error can't boot 'kernel' if too
many devices/pools are connected to the machine. In my case:
2 SAS disks with 2 pools
2 SATA disks
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 12:30 AM, Daniel Eischen deisc...@freebsd.org wrote:
[...]
Thank you all for your swift replies. It seems to indeed work for
forked processes. The app at $work (written on and for Linux)
transported an unnamed semaphore over a POSIX shared memory object.
I'll probably make
USB root partition for booting off UFS is something I have considered. I
have looked around and it seems that all the install FreeBSD onto USB
stick guides seem to involve a lot of manual work from a fixit environment,
does sysinstall not recognise USB drives as a valid disk device to
On Tue, 02.06.2009 at 11:16:10 +0200, Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
Hi all,
so I went ahead and updated my ~7.2 file server to the new ZFS goodness,
and before running any further tests, I already discovered something
weird and annoying.
I'm using a mirror on GELI, where one disk is usually
Hi all,
so I went ahead and updated my ~7.2 file server to the new ZFS goodness,
and before running any further tests, I already discovered something
weird and annoying.
I'm using a mirror on GELI, where one disk is usually *not* attached as
a means of poor man's backup. (I had to go that route,
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, Dan Naumov wrote:
USB root partition for booting off UFS is something I have
considered. I have looked around and it seems that all the install
FreeBSD onto USB stick guides seem to involve a lot of manual work
from a fixit environment, does sysinstall not recognise USB
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, Dan Naumov wrote:
USB root partition for booting off UFS is something I have
considered. I have looked around and it seems that all the install
FreeBSD onto USB stick guides seem to involve a lot of manual work
from a fixit environment, does
Doug Rabson wrote:
On 1 Jun 2009, at 11:22, Henri Hennebert wrote:
Hello,
During my tests (succesful) to directly boot from ZFS (with zfsboot
and gptzfsboot) I encounter the error can't boot 'kernel' if too
many devices/pools are connected to the machine. In my case:
2 SAS disks with 2
root filesystem is remounted read write only for some configuration
changes, then remounted back to read only.
Does this work reliably for you? I tried doing the remounting trick,
both for root and /usr, back in the 4.x time frame. And could never
get it to work - would always end up with
FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE
GPT + gmirror + gjournal
May 31 10:15:48 netserv1 kernel: Fatal trap 9: general protection
fault while in kernel mode
May 31 10:15:48 netserv1 kernel: cpuid = 0; apic id = 00
May 31 10:15:48 netserv1 kernel: instruction pointer= 0x8:0x8059f667
May 31 10:15:48
2009/6/2 David N david...@gmail.com:
FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE
GPT + gmirror + gjournal
May 31 10:15:48 netserv1 kernel: Fatal trap 9: general protection
fault while in kernel mode
May 31 10:15:48 netserv1 kernel: cpuid = 0; apic id = 00
May 31 10:15:48 netserv1 kernel: instruction pointer =
On Monday 01 June 2009 5:17:48 pm Bruce Simpson wrote:
Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
If process-shared semaphores really work, then the above structure is
not a pathological case. Effectively, sem_t is carved in stone. So
process-private semaphores should continue to have most of their stuff
in
sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
root filesystem is remounted read write only for some configuration
changes, then remounted back to read only.
Does this work reliably for you? I tried doing the remounting trick,
both for root and /usr, back in the 4.x time frame. And could never
get it to work -
on 01/06/2009 19:22 Andriy Gapon said the following:
Henri,
thank you very much for testing!
It look like the patch did its job.
P.S. hopefully someone is looking into the cause of the assertion.
I think I cracked it.
This is where ds-ds_lock.m_owner gets corrupted:
(gdb) c
Continuing.
on 02/06/2009 17:06 Andriy Gapon said the following:
So I am quite sure that mutex_owned should be defined as follows:
#define mutex_owned(l) pthread_mutex_isowned_np((l)-m_lock)
Actually:
#define mutex_owned(l) pthread_mutex_isowned_np((l)-m_lock)
And on dangers of ignored
Hello,
just a word to say that the upgrade from FreeBSD-7.1 to 7.2 has solved all
problems i had
on my desktop (very slow windowing, etc.) without changing anything to the
installed ports.
Now everything works excellent in accordance with the FreeBSD tradition.
Thanks for the good work of the
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Aristedes Maniatis a...@ish.com.au wrote:
On 31/05/2009, at 4:41 AM, Dan Naumov wrote:
To top that
off, even when/if you do it right, not your entire disk goes to ZFS
anyway, because you still do need a swap and a /boot to be non-ZFS, so
you will have to
sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
root filesystem is remounted read write only for some configuration
changes, then remounted back to read only.
Does this work reliably for you? I tried doing the remounting trick,
both for root and /usr, back in the 4.x time frame. And could never
get it to work -
Up till Sunday in 8-current, and for a long time in general
network.subr (part of the rc.d system) has emitted a warning that
values of network_interfaces other than AUTO are deprecated. I removed
that warning in HEAD Sunday, and there is no a discussion about
whether or not it should be put back,
This reminds me. I was reading the release and upgrade notes of OpenSolaris
2009.6 and noted one thing about upgrading from a previous version to the
new one::
When you pick the upgrade OS option in the OpenSolaris installer, it will
check if you are using a ZFS root partition and if you do, it
A little more info for the (perhaps) curious:
Managing Multiple Boot Environments:
http://dlc.sun.com/osol/docs/content/2009.06/getstart/bootenv.html#bootenvmgr
Introduction to Boot Environments:
http://dlc.sun.com/osol/docs/content/2009.06/snapupgrade/index.html
- Dan Naumov
On Tue, Jun 2,
On 2 Jun 2009, at 21:20, Doug Barton wrote:
Up till Sunday in 8-current, and for a long time in general
network.subr (part of the rc.d system) has emitted a warning that
values of network_interfaces other than AUTO are deprecated. I removed
that warning in HEAD Sunday, and there is no a
Ruben van Staveren wrote:
Being a bit of my own devils advocate here, network_interfaces=AUTO is
already true for ipv6.
FYI, ipv6_network_interfaces exists for this purpose.
Thanks for your post, it's good information to add to the pile.
Doug
___
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 10:30:46PM +0200, Ruben van Staveren wrote:
On 2 Jun 2009, at 21:20, Doug Barton wrote:
Up till Sunday in 8-current, and for a long time in general
network.subr (part of the rc.d system) has emitted a warning that
values of network_interfaces other than AUTO are
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 03:51:25PM -0500, David Kelly wrote:
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 10:30:46PM +0200, Ruben van Staveren wrote:
On 2 Jun 2009, at 21:20, Doug Barton wrote:
Up till Sunday in 8-current, and for a long time in general
network.subr (part of the rc.d system) has emitted a
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 10:30:46PM +0200, Ruben van Staveren wrote:
On 2 Jun 2009, at 21:20, Doug Barton wrote:
Up till Sunday in 8-current, and for a long time in general
network.subr (part of the rc.d system) has emitted a warning that
values of network_interfaces other than AUTO are
I only want to configure only the interfaces that are connected and
that I know about. especially in combination with IPv6 there is a nit
that you'll get autoconfiguration for all interfaces unless they are
all explicitly configured.
bingo!
To repeat what I wrote earlier today on another list there's no need
to worry about hot plugged or newly added interfaces getting magically
configured to do dhcp or anything else[0].
such as detected by services such as bind/unbound?
randy
___
Ruben van Staveren writes:
Up till Sunday in 8-current, and for a long time in general
network.subr (part of the rc.d system) has emitted a warning that
values of network_interfaces other than AUTO are deprecated. I removed
that warning in HEAD Sunday, and there is no a discussion
I have a proof of concept system doing this. I started with a 7.2
install on zfs root, compiled world and kernel from 8, took a snapshot
and made a clone for the 7.2 install, and proceeded to upgrade the
current fs to 8.0. After updating the loader.conf in the 7.2 zfs to
point to its own
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 07:22:34AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
To repeat what I wrote earlier today on another list there's no need
to worry about hot plugged or newly added interfaces getting magically
configured to do dhcp or anything else[0].
such as detected by services such as
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 12:20:34PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
Up till Sunday in 8-current, and for a long time in general
network.subr (part of the rc.d system) has emitted a warning that
values of network_interfaces other than AUTO are deprecated. I
removed that warning in HEAD Sunday, and
34 matches
Mail list logo
