On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 05:05:59PM +0200, Alessandro DE LAURENZIS wrote: > Mike, all, > > On Sat 12/08/2017 19:01, Alessandro DE LAURENZIS wrote: > > Hello Mike, > > > > > > root on sd0a (ff014e14e96d5c40.a) swap on sd0b dump on sd0b > > > > WARNING: / was not properly unmounted > > > > so: it tries to unpack a hibernated image, but then it is like the > > previous hibernation didn't complete, since a fsck is forced. > > > > But I was just reviewing this stuff, and can give some additional > > information: the IntelDRM doesn't play any roles here; actually what I'm > > observing is that an unmodified /bsd works flawlessly, instead the > > hibernation "fails" after a modification with config(8); I just do the > > following: > > > > [....................snip....................] > > sh> config -o /bsd.noulpt -e /bsd > > OpenBSD 6.1-current (GENERIC.MP) #44: Thu Aug 3 12:12:07 MDT 2017 > > [email protected]:/usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC.MP > > Enter 'help' for information > > ukc> disable ulpt* > > 299 ulpt* disabled > > ukc> quit > > [....................snip....................] > > > > and then rebooting with /bsd.noulpt and hibernating/resuming, I see the > > problem. > > > > Does that make any sense? > > after a discussion with semarie@ on #openbsd, the point here is that in > /etc/rc we have: > > ln -fh /bsd /bsd.booted > > so in order to be compatible with current KARL/hibernation/resume mechanism, > the booted kernel *must* be called "/bsd". >
Although this may be true, that's the default and IMO doesn't need to be documented as such. But thanks nonetheless for clarifying this. -ml > I think a mention in https://www.openbsd.org/faq/current.html could be > beneficial to other users, too. > > Thanks for your time (and sorry again for the poor report). > > -- > Alessandro DE LAURENZIS > [mailto:[email protected]] > LinkedIn: http://it.linkedin.com/in/delaurenzis
