Re: Recent FreeBSD, NFSv4 and /var/db/mounttab
Claude Buisson wrote: >Hi, > >Last month, I started switching all my systems (stable/9, stable/10, >stable/11 and current) to NFSv4, and I found that: > > on current (svn 312652) an entry is added to /var/db/mounttab by >mount_nfs(8), but not suppressed by umount(8). It can be suppressed by >rpc.umntall(8). > >The same anomaly appears on stable/11 after upgrading to svn 312950. > >It is relatively easy to trace this anomaly to r308871 on current and >its MFHs (r309517 for stable/11). > >Patching sbin/umount/umount.c to restore the RPC call for NFSv4 makes >umount(8) suppress the mounttab entry as before. > >I do not know what is the proper solution, as suppressing the >modification of mounttab by mount_nfs(8) for NFSv4 could be an (more >complicated) alternative ! This would be the correct fix. The entries in mounttab are meaningless. Even for NFSv3, all they do is provide a "best guess" answer for "showmount". - The Mount protocol is not part of NFSv4. I had a patch which disabled it for NFSv4 servers, but some folk liked the idea of having "showmount -e" to work, so I didn't commit it. rick ps: I had actually thought mount_nfs(8) didn't do a Mount protocol RPC for NFSv4, but I guess it is. That needs to be fixed, since NFSv4 servers don't need to support Mount at all. ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
OK, I just have successfully wrote both problematic cards in the same USB card reader/port as the USB HDD above, using the same data set. The only CAM errors were at the same time as cards have run out of space. Now testing cping between them, but as they are on the same dual card reader/USB port it's unbearably slow. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/FreeBSD-11-0-STABLE-0-r310265-amd64-seems-to-be-cpi-ing-garbage-to-mounted-FAT32-fs-after-10-20-GB-tp6154963p6164736.html Sent from the freebsd-stable mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ 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"
Re: Building i386 on i386
On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 04:05:41PM +, hartmut.bra...@dlr.de wrote: > The problem is not the memory but the 2GB process limit. Did you configured PAE ? Normal (non-PAE) kernels with default configuration of U/K split provide 3G to userspace. On amd64 kernel running 32bit processes, you get 4G for userspace. > > harti > > -Original Message- > From: Dimitry Andric [mailto:d...@freebsd.org] > Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 4:56 PM > To: Brandt, Hartmut > Cc: sta...@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Building i386 on i386 > > On 01 Feb 2017, at 14:27, hartmut.bra...@dlr.de wrote: > > > > is $subj still supposed to work on 11.0? I get a 'virtual memory exhausted' > > during linking of clang. > > How much memory does your machine have? I build this regularly, on a VM with > 2G RAM (and 4G swap). > > -Dimitry > > ___ > 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" ___ 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"
RE: Building i386 on i386
The problem is not the memory but the 2GB process limit. harti -Original Message- From: Dimitry Andric [mailto:d...@freebsd.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 4:56 PM To: Brandt, Hartmut Cc: sta...@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Building i386 on i386 On 01 Feb 2017, at 14:27, hartmut.bra...@dlr.de wrote: > > is $subj still supposed to work on 11.0? I get a 'virtual memory exhausted' > during linking of clang. How much memory does your machine have? I build this regularly, on a VM with 2G RAM (and 4G swap). -Dimitry ___ 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"
Re: Building i386 on i386
On 01 Feb 2017, at 14:27, hartmut.bra...@dlr.de wrote: > > is $subj still supposed to work on 11.0? I get a 'virtual memory exhausted' > during linking of clang. How much memory does your machine have? I build this regularly, on a VM with 2G RAM (and 4G swap). -Dimitry signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 07:16:28AM -0700, Jakub Lach wrote: > I'm not sure if it's the same thing. Most of the times the corruption was > silent > then. > > Nonetheless, the outcome was the same after newfs HDD with UFS2- > > http://www.pastebin.ca/3762661 > > I would 'blame' USB now, if only I did not migrate/clone the whole system to > SSD > via dump/the same USB not very long ago?? Note that in the paste above you get write errors reported, while the corruption happens while you read from the volume. ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 07:25:18AM -0700, Jakub Lach wrote: > I would think so, if only I would not clone the disk/system via the same USB > port mere weeks ago. > Moreover, sysutils/f3 fully writes and validates (checksums) 30G+ memory > cards via the same port without problems. In my case controller don't always be broken, only from some time. Data corruption over my USB depends on data access pattern. ___ 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"
Recent FreeBSD, NFSv4 and /var/db/mounttab
Hi, Last month, I started switching all my systems (stable/9, stable/10, stable/11 and current) to NFSv4, and I found that: on current (svn 312652) an entry is added to /var/db/mounttab by mount_nfs(8), but not suppressed by umount(8). It can be suppressed by rpc.umntall(8). The same anomaly appears on stable/11 after upgrading to svn 312950. It is relatively easy to trace this anomaly to r308871 on current and its MFHs (r309517 for stable/11). Patching sbin/umount/umount.c to restore the RPC call for NFSv4 makes umount(8) suppress the mounttab entry as before. I do not know what is the proper solution, as suppressing the modification of mounttab by mount_nfs(8) for NFSv4 could be an (more complicated) alternative ! Thanks for your attention, Claude Buisson ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
I would think so, if only I would not clone the disk/system via the same USB port mere weeks ago. Moreover, sysutils/f3 fully writes and validates (checksums) 30G+ memory cards via the same port without problems. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/FreeBSD-11-0-STABLE-0-r310265-amd64-seems-to-be-cpi-ing-garbage-to-mounted-FAT32-fs-after-10-20-GB-tp6154963p6164677.html Sent from the freebsd-stable mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 06:52:01AM -0700, Jakub Lach wrote: > Yes, HDD and card reader was USB mounted. > > This time, I've copied about 12G from 38G from internal SSD (UFS2) to > HDD via USB (FAT32), then system panicked with CAM errors. I am have like issuse on laptop w/ broken USB controller. ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
I'm not sure if it's the same thing. Most of the times the corruption was silent then. Nonetheless, the outcome was the same after newfs HDD with UFS2- http://www.pastebin.ca/3762661 I would 'blame' USB now, if only I did not migrate/clone the whole system to SSD via dump/the same USB not very long ago?? -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/FreeBSD-11-0-STABLE-0-r310265-amd64-seems-to-be-cpi-ing-garbage-to-mounted-FAT32-fs-after-10-20-GB-tp6154963p6164674.html Sent from the freebsd-stable mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ 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"
Re: update /usr/ports to same version as pkg upgrade?
Hello, On Wed, 1 Feb 2017, Ronald Klop wrote: Hi, Is it possible to update the /usr/ports tree to the same version as is used by the default pkg repositories? I use some ports which are not distributed as pkgs. When I 'portsnap auto' the ports tree gets new updates which are not in the pkgs yet and I don't want to rebuild those. I'm also able to fetch the ports tree by svn if that gives more possibilities than portsnap for this. So, is there a way to know from which svn revision the pkgs are build by the FreeBSD servers? Or something similar. I once raised a request for this on github and it was "mostly" implemented, but I never found how it works: https://github.com/freebsd/pkg/issues/328 Greetings Michael ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
Yes, HDD and card reader was USB mounted. This time, I've copied about 12G from 38G from internal SSD (UFS2) to HDD via USB (FAT32), then system panicked with CAM errors. http://pastebin.ca/3762654 Apart from that, there are no corrupted files in the way there were with card reader. I will newfs now this HDD and try again. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/FreeBSD-11-0-STABLE-0-r310265-amd64-seems-to-be-cpi-ing-garbage-to-mounted-FAT32-fs-after-10-20-GB-tp6154963p6164672.html Sent from the freebsd-stable mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ 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"
Building i386 on i386
Hi, is $subj still supposed to work on 11.0? I get a 'virtual memory exhausted' during linking of clang. harti ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 06:02:45AM -0700, Jakub Lach wrote: > Yes, it has happened also with another device. Which was not a card reader > (HDD > mounted by USB), and I have used the same card reader configuration to copy > the memory card content with iMac. Is your card reader USB-attached, same as the HDD you mentioned ? Test with UFS filesystem put onto a card or HDD, does system read garbage or panics due to metadata inconsistency, under the load ? ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
Moreover, sysutils/f3 was reading and writing with this memory card configuration fine. Which is why I don't _blame_ fs, I only know that FAT + cp -r consistently gave me problems, for one reason or another. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/FreeBSD-11-0-STABLE-0-r310265-amd64-seems-to-be-cpi-ing-garbage-to-mounted-FAT32-fs-after-10-20-GB-tp6154963p6164662.html Sent from the freebsd-stable mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
Yes, it has happened also with another device. Which was not a card reader (HDD mounted by USB), and I have used the same card reader configuration to copy the memory card content with iMac. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/FreeBSD-11-0-STABLE-0-r310265-amd64-seems-to-be-cpi-ing-garbage-to-mounted-FAT32-fs-after-10-20-GB-tp6154963p6164661.html Sent from the freebsd-stable mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:38:07AM -0700, Jakub Lach wrote: > As it shows your interest, I appreciate your answer very much. > > I was a bit let down then, I had to (using the same card reader), > cp -r using borrowed Apple iMac. It worked as it should. > > It was FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 as in subject, > I will reconsider retesting now and filling a PR, with a different > data set and medium though. Thanks. Does that happen on any device which carries FAT fs, or since you mentioned a card reader, does it happen with any other filesystem carried by a volume on the card ? In other words, why do you blame FAT and not the card reader ? ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
As it shows your interest, I appreciate your answer very much. I was a bit let down then, I had to (using the same card reader), cp -r using borrowed Apple iMac. It worked as it should. It was FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 as in subject, I will reconsider retesting now and filling a PR, with a different data set and medium though. Thanks. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/FreeBSD-11-0-STABLE-0-r310265-amd64-seems-to-be-cpi-ing-garbage-to-mounted-FAT32-fs-after-10-20-GB-tp6154963p6164655.html Sent from the freebsd-stable mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ 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"
Re: FreeBSD 11.0-STABLE #0 r310265 amd64 seems to be cpi-ing garbage to mounted FAT32 fs after 10-20 GB.
On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 20:06:31 +0100, Jakub Lach wrote: Hello, I've recently tried to make a switch to a bigger memory card in some device; what I've discovered, is that FreeBSD is cp-ing garbage to a mounted FAT32 fs after first 10-20 GB (depending on luck). What I mean by garbage are non removable 'files' with random names which cannot be escaped. The fastest way to get rid of them is newfs. I've initially thought the problem were faulty memory card(s) but I was able to test them (mounted as FAT32 still) with sysutils/f3. They are fine, the utility writes(!) and reads them correctly. However, as soon as cp (-a) gets involved, the garbage appears, sometimes with CAM errors and reboots. Additionally, I saw exactly the same errors with FAT32 on HDD mounted via USB, so the cards are not a problem. What I can do? 1. Reading is not at all affected, I can backup (cp -a) mounted FAT32 cards to UFS2 (local disk) without problems. 2. I can mount FAT32 and test the cards with sysutils/f3. The medium (card) is tested via the same USB dual card reader as below. What I can't do reliably, as garbage appears after first 10-20 GB? 1. I can't cp (-a) from UFS2 to mounted FAT32 partition. Smaller writes are a matter of luck. 2. I can't cp (-a) from FAT32 (mounted fs on memory card A in dual card reader) to another FAT32 (mounted fs on memory card B in a dual card reader). Same problem as above. Any ideas? I see nobody replied. I don't have an answer, but this might help. You can try the freebsd-fs mailinglist. It is about filesystems. You can also provide more information about your system. What version of FreeBSD are you running? 'uname -a' and the content of /var/run/dmesg.boot as a starter. You can file a problem report (PR) at https://bugs.freebsd.org/ with a reproducable test case. Does the problem also occur if you use rsync to copy the files? Regards, Ronald. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/FreeBSD-11-0-STABLE-0-r310265-amd64-seems-to-be-cpi-ing-garbage-to-mounted-FAT32-fs-after-10-20-GB-tp6154963.html Sent from the freebsd-stable mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ 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" ___ 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"
Re: update /usr/ports to same version as pkg upgrade?
On 2017/02/01 11:19, Ronald Klop wrote: > Is it possible to update the /usr/ports tree to the same version as is > used by the default pkg repositories? > I use some ports which are not distributed as pkgs. When I 'portsnap > auto' the ports tree gets new updates which are not in the pkgs yet and > I don't want to rebuild those. > I'm also able to fetch the ports tree by svn if that gives more > possibilities than portsnap for this. > > So, is there a way to know from which svn revision the pkgs are build by > the FreeBSD servers? Or something similar. The precise revision number used for pkg builds isn't published, so no it's not possible to synchronise exactly. However, what you can do is download the appropriate quarterly branch of the ports. At the moment that's something like: svn co https://svn.freebsd.org/ports/branches/2017Q1 /usr/ports This is the branch that the official packages are built from, and it changes a lot more slowly than HEAD, so your chances of running into version conflicts are much reduced. You will have to remember to 'svn switch' to each new quarterly branch, but that's only four times a year. Cheers, Matthew signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
update /usr/ports to same version as pkg upgrade?
Hi, Is it possible to update the /usr/ports tree to the same version as is used by the default pkg repositories? I use some ports which are not distributed as pkgs. When I 'portsnap auto' the ports tree gets new updates which are not in the pkgs yet and I don't want to rebuild those. I'm also able to fetch the ports tree by svn if that gives more possibilities than portsnap for this. So, is there a way to know from which svn revision the pkgs are build by the FreeBSD servers? Or something similar. Regards, Ronald. ___ 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"
Re: Boot partition size
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017, at 08:38 AM, krad wrote: > Are we really that worried about 90-99 MB when we are talking about many TB > drives? Even the entry-mid range SSD are in the region of 256-512 GB these > days? Indeed. I've been using 100MB boot partitions for many years now, because I see no point in allocating anything less. I'm not even the type to always have the latest hardware, the last disks I bought were 720GB. 100MB is only 10% of 1GB. The first hard disk I ever bought for myself, in the 1990s, affordable when I had almost no spending money, was 4GB. -- I'm too old to use vi. ___ 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"
Re: Boot partition size
Are we really that worried about 90-99 MB when we are talking about many TB drives? Even the entry-mid range SSD are in the region of 256-512 GB these days? On 31 January 2017 at 14:35, Warner Losh wrote: > The UEFI standard suggests something large like 100MB. There are a > number of firmware updating programs that run as .efi images. It > would be prudent to allow more than the bare minimum in case you wind > up needing them down the line. boot1.efi is likely to grow > significantly in the future. Maybe not 100x, a 1MB is likely once it > has all the features it needs. 10MB might be a safe upper bound. > > Warner > > On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 7:00 AM, Andreas Nilsson > wrote: > > Well, 100mb might be relevant if you ever want to dual-boot. The > relevant > > efi file seems to be < 100k > > > > It may go up in size, but I doubt we will see a 100x increase. > > > > /A > > > > On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 1:03 PM, krad wrote: > > > >> Its worth noting you should also go for GPT layout and have a 100meg or > so > >> partition provisioned as well so you can do a uefi boot. Even if you > arent > >> going to use it right now. > >> > >> > >> On 30 January 2017 at 03:41, Aristedes Maniatis wrote: > >> > >> > On 30/1/17 2:20pm, Freddie Cash wrote: > >> > > And, you may be able to do that on the existing disks, as ZFS now > >> leaves > >> > a MB or two of "slack space" at the end of the device used in the > vdev. > >> > This allows for using drives/partitions that are the same size in MB > but > >> > have different numbers of sectors. This was an issue on the early ZFS > >> days. > >> > > > >> > > So, you may be able to resize the freebsd-zfs partition by a > handful of > >> > KB without actually changing the size of the vdev. > >> > > >> > > >> > Brilliant, thank you. That worked a treat with a new boot size of > 256k. > >> > > >> > > >> > Note that this page: https://wiki.freebsd.org/ > >> RootOnZFS/GPTZFSBoot/Mirror > >> > needs to be adjusted. This line: > >> > > >> > gpart add -b 34 -s 128k -t freebsd-boot ad0 > >> > > >> > needs to instead be > >> > > >> > gpart add -a 4k -s 512k -t freebsd-boot ad0 > >> > > >> > > >> > I don't have edit rights. Probably someone needs to clean up and merge > >> > many of these pages: https://wiki.freebsd.org/RootOnZFS/ > >> > > >> > > >> > Ari > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > --> > >> > Aristedes Maniatis > >> > CEO, ish > >> > https://www.ish.com.au > >> > GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A > >> > > >> > > >> ___ > >> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@ > freebsd.org" > >> > > ___ > > 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 > " > ___ 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"
