Re: A recent 10.2-STABLE no longer builds on a no-exec /usr/src file system
So, is this a new state of affairs that /usr/src file system needs to be mounted exec in order for buildworld to succeed, or is this an unintended change and I should file a bug report? Mark On 2015-11-26 19:44, Miroslav Lachman wrote: Mark Martinec wrote on 11/26/2015 19:31: Up to about a week ago building world on FreeBSD 10.2-STABLE went just fine. Today after svn update the build fails: # make buildworld [...] CC='cc ' mkdep -f .depend.getprotoent_test -a -I/usr/src/lib/libc/tests/net -I/usr/src/lib/libnetbsd -I/usr/src/contrib/netbsd-tests -std=gnu99 /usr/src/contrib/netbsd-tests/lib/libc/net/t_getprotoent.c echo getprotoent_test: /usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/lib/libc.a /usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/lib/private/libatf-c.a >> .depend.getprotoent_test (cd /usr/src/lib/libc/tests/net && make -f /usr/src/lib/libc/tests/net/Makefile _RECURSING_PROGS= SUBDIR= PROG=ether_aton_test DEPENDFILE=.depend.ether_aton_test .MAKE.DEPENDFILE=.depend.ether_aton_test depend) /usr/src/contrib/netbsd-tests/lib/libc/net/gen_ether_subr /usr/src/sys/net/if_ethersubr.c aton_ether_subr.c make[7]: exec(/usr/src/contrib/netbsd-tests/lib/libc/net/gen_ether_subr) failed (Permission denied) *** Error code 1 Stop. make[7]: stopped in /usr/src/lib/libc/tests/net *** Error code 1 It turns out that our file system /usr/src had an "exec" flag turned off, so now running a command: /usr/src/contrib/netbsd-tests/lib/libc/net/gen_ether_subr fails with "Permission denied". It would be valuable if building a system on an exec-protected src file system would continue to be possible. Not sure if the /usr/src/contrib/netbsd-tests/lib/libc/net/gen_ether_subr is the only such new command breaking the build. Anyway, a simple workaround is to run shell from a command line instead of as a shebang, i.e.: # /bin/sh /usr/src/contrib/netbsd-tests/lib/libc/net/gen_ether_subr instead of: # /usr/src/contrib/netbsd-tests/lib/libc/net/gen_ether_subr I was puzzled by similar thing years ago. I was using /var/db and /tmp mounted with noexec. And then there was some changes. Ports need /var/db with exec because of some script in /var/db/pkg and /tmp must have exec too for buildworld or installworld (I don't remember it well, now I always do mount -u -o current,exec /tmp before build + install world and kernel) Anyway - it would be better to not have these partitions mounted with exec. Miroslav Lachman ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
jiberish output in mail from cron
I am running cron jobs on multiple machines, and the output is mailed to
our support department.
But the output contains some jiberish text.
In this example is is from a cronjob that deletes some old snapshots.
DELETE: storage/rsnapshot/custumor2@rsnapshot-2015-11-20 from Fri Nov 20
21:02 2015
: SNIP : about 50 lines
DELETE: storage/rsnapshot/dmo1@rsnapshot-2015-11-20 from Fri Nov 20
21:02 2015
DELETE:
storage/rsnap€hot/demo2@rsnapshot-2015-11-20 from Fri Nov 20 21:02
2015€€2015€ðåÿÿÿ€€IŽ€€€€€@€€€@€€@€æÿÿÿ€€Ð‹€€€çæÿÿÿÀ€€€ÿÿ?€€€@€ðO>€€€€€€€åÀ€€€Àæÿÿÿ€€=
€€€Iéi0òµ]€€€
€€€À€€€€€€$€€€H€€€€°€€€€0çÿÿÿ€€{Á€€€È€€€€€H€€€HÿC€€€À€€€€€h€€€àþC€€€H€€€€àþC€€€À€€çÿÿÿ€€aÅ€€€HÿC€€€àþC€€€ €€€€€€€€€ÐËB€€€€€€@ìÿÿÿ€€I8€€€¸èÿÿÿ€€
êÿÿÿ€€
èÿÿÿ€€MÞ`€€€€èÿÿÿ€€Ž÷`€€€€èÿÿÿ€€ø4 €€€(èÿÿÿ€€¬ñ
€€€(èÿÿÿ€€€àb€€€€éÿÿÿ€€€êÿÿÿ€€€éÿÿÿ€€MÞ`€€€€€€€hèÿÿÿ€€Ðo
€€€€€€€€€ÿ€€`éÿÿÿ€€Pû
€€€8éÿÿÿ€€àèÿÿÿ€€€Rb€€€€ êÿÿÿ€€
éÿÿÿ€€ñï`€àb€€€€ü
€€€üœ°˜éÿÿÿ€€@éÿÿÿ€€€Rb€êÿÿÿ€€€éÿÿÿ€€ñï`€àb€€€€Q@€À‹«§›“ €€€°€b€€€€€€€àb€€€€Ðo
€€€hëÿÿÿ€€Ðëÿÿÿ€€èêÿÿÿ€€èêÿÿÿ€€€êÿÿÿ€€€
b€êÿÿÿ€€,î`€àb€€€€Q@€À‹«§›“ €€€°€b€€€€€€€àb€€€€Ðo
€€€hëÿÿÿ€€Ðëÿÿÿ€€èêÿÿÿ€€hëÿÿÿ€€€ b€
b€€€€°êÿÿÿ€€Ã`€
b€¤b€¨b€¬b€àb€€€€®
€€Q@€À‹«§›“ ÿ€€°€b€€€€€€€ÿ€€hëÿÿÿ€€êÿÿÿ€€€€€€€€Ðëÿÿÿ€€
b€€€€Pëÿÿÿ€€‹¿`€€€€ëÿÿÿ€€hëÿÿÿ€€,@€4#a€€€€Q@€Q@€À‹«§›“ °€b€€€€àb€€€€Ðo
€€€hëÿÿÿ€€€ b€€€€Pëÿÿÿ€€4#a€€€€Ðo
€€€PLìÿÿÿ€€ ½`€€€€8ëÿÿÿ€€€€€ÿ€€›¼`€
b€€€€Xëÿÿÿ€€€ìÿÿÿ€€€€€€€€¸€€`E‚€€€€€€€àb€€€€FdÀ€€€€€€€€€€€€0íÿÿÿ€€°ìÿÿÿ€€m”`€€€€Iéi0òµ] €€€€€€€€€%ïÿÿÿ€€0íÿÿÿ€€pìÿÿÿ€€ˆL€€€#ïÿÿÿ€€FdÀ€€€€€€0íÿÿÿ€€°ìshot/leisuregifts@rsnapshot-2015-11-20
from Fri Nov 20 21:02 2015
DELETE: storage/rsnapshot/demo2@rsnapshot-2015-11-20 from Fri Nov 20
21:02 2015
DELETE: storage/rsnapshot/demo3@rsnapshot-2015-11-20 from Fri Nov 20
21:02 2015
DELETE: storage/rsnapshot/demo4@rsnapshot-2015-11-20 from Fri Nov 20
21:03 2015
DELETE: storage/rsnapshot/demo5@rsnapshot-2015-11-20 from Fri Nov 20
21:03 2015
DELETE: storage/rsnapshot/demo6@rsnapshot-2015-11-20 from Fri Nov 20
21:03 2015
Then again about 50 lines OK and then again some jiberish text and so on
the cronjob is as follows.
0 8 * * *
/root/scripts/zfs-clean-snapshots.sh -d 14 -p rsnapshot-2015
I have this on multiple machines.
Is there a buffer I hit or something
regards,
Johan
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
ICH5 ATA DMA timeouts
Good day everyone ! First of all I would advise you to change all of your hard drives interface cables with new ones. >Понедельник, 7 декабря 2015, 12:00 UTC от freebsd-stable-requ...@freebsd.org: > >Send freebsd-stable mailing list submissions to >freebsd-stable@freebsd.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >freebsd-stable-requ...@freebsd.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at >freebsd-stable-ow...@freebsd.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of freebsd-stable digest..." > > >Today's Topics: > > 1. urtwn regression(?) from 10.2 to current r291431 > (Anton Shterenlikht) > 2. Re: urtwn regression(?) from 10.2 to current r291431 > (Hans Petter Selasky) > 3. Re: urtwn regression(?) from 10.2 to current r291431 > (Anton Shterenlikht) > 4. Re: urtwn regression(?) from 10.2 to current r291431 > (Michael Mitchell) > 5. Re: urtwn regression(?) from 10.2 to current r291431 > (Adrian Chadd) > 6. ICH5 ATA DMA timeouts (Perry Hutchison) > 7. Re: application coredump behavior differences between FreeBSD > 7.0andFreeBSD 10.1 (Konstantin Belousov) > 8. Re: ICH5 ATA DMA timeouts (Steven Hartland) > 9. Re: ICH5 ATA DMA timeouts (Florian Ermisch) > 10. jiberish output in mail from cron (Johan Hendriks) > > >-- > >Message: 1 >Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2015 06:14:52 -0800 (PST) >From: Anton Shterenlikht < me...@bris.ac.uk > >To: freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org >Subject: urtwn regression(?) from 10.2 to current r291431 >Message-ID: < 201512061414.tb6eepty041...@mech-as222.men.bris.ac.uk > > >I posted this about a week ago: > >http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2015-November/058683.html > >The problem is that urtwn stopped >working in current r291431. > >I did more testing with the same revision, >and sometimes it would work, but extremely >slowly, and sometimes seemingly associate >but get an address of 0.0.0.0. > >I now installed 10.2-RELEASE-p8 and >the urtwn works fine, no issues at all. > >Does this look like a bug at some recent >current revision? Should I file a PR? > >I's just I recall there have been major >chages to wlan, so perphaps I'm forgetting >to change the config in recent current? > >Please advise > >Anton > > >-- > >Message: 2 >Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2015 15:33:18 +0100 >From: Hans Petter Selasky < h...@selasky.org > >To: me...@bris.ac.uk, freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org, >freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Adrian Chadd < adr...@freebsd.org > >Subject: Re: urtwn regression(?) from 10.2 to current r291431 >Message-ID: < 5664472e.3090...@selasky.org > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed > >On 12/06/15 15:14, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: >> I posted this about a week ago: >> >> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2015-November/058683.html >> >> The problem is that urtwn stopped >> working in current r291431. >> >> I did more testing with the same revision, >> and sometimes it would work, but extremely >> slowly, and sometimes seemingly associate >> but get an address of 0.0.0.0. >> >> I now installed 10.2-RELEASE-p8 and >> the urtwn works fine, no issues at all. >> >> Does this look like a bug at some recent >> current revision? Should I file a PR? >> >> I's just I recall there have been major >> chages to wlan, so perphaps I'm forgetting >> to change the config in recent current? >> >> Please advise >> >> Anton > >Hi, > >There is work ongoing in the WLAN drivers. Did you try the latest -current? > >--HPS > > > >-- > >Message: 3 >Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2015 06:44:26 -0800 (PST) >From: Anton Shterenlikht < me...@bris.ac.uk > >To: adr...@freebsd.org, freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org, >freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, h...@selasky.org, me...@bris.ac.uk >Subject: Re: urtwn regression(?) from 10.2 to current r291431 >Message-ID: < 201512061444.tb6eipmm041...@mech-as222.men.bris.ac.uk > > >>From h...@selasky.org Sun Dec 6 14:41:27 2015 >> >>On 12/06/15 15:14, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: >>> I posted this about a week ago: >>> >>> >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2015-November/058683.html >>> >>> The problem is that urtwn stopped >>> working in current r291431. >>> >>> I did more testing with the same revision, >>> and sometimes it would work, but extremely >>> slowly, and sometimes seemingly associate >>> but get an address of 0.0.0.0. >>> >>> I now installed 10.2-RELEASE-p8 and >>> the urtwn works fine, no issues at all. >>> >>> Does this look like a bug at some recent >>> current revision? Should I file a PR? >>> >>> I's just I recall there have been major >>> chages to wlan, so perphaps I'm forgetting >>> to change the config in recent current? >>> >>> Please
the highest minor_numbers for the nines and the tens
howdy , folks --- this is an abridged version of a post to -questions@ . i thank the person , there , who reminded me of this list [ but , still , -questions@ is a good place to start ] . i am already aware of the schedules for 10.3 and 11.0 ; but , that is not why i write . i can make assumptions ; i can divine_from_entrails ; i seek a person with --knowledge-- . a] is it --known-- that 9.3 is the last of the nines or , conversely , is there a non_zero probability that there will be a 9.4 ? b] is it --known-- that 10.3 is to be the last of the tens or , conversely , is there a non_zero probability that there will be a 10.4 ? if neither of these are known , then does some_one [ perhaps , a member of the re_team ] know the current state_of_thinking regarding the highest minor_number that will exist for each of the major_numbers that were specified in [a] and [b] , above ? for the benefit of those readers who conclude that i am un_aware , i thank you for your willingness to be helpful ; however , i already know about the security/support web_page . the information for nine , on the web_page , has differed from the information posted on -announce@ , in the past . this suggests that one person thinks one thing , while another person operates under a different apprehension . also , just because the web_page says one thing , today , does not mean that it can not be changed , in the future . for ten , this post is about the identification of the term , "last release" . please cc to : emailrob at emailrob dot com , as i am not subscribed to -stable@ . in advance , i thank one and all . rob ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
