I just tried to boot a -current kernel cvsupped
at Sat Jun 2 14:11:35 PDT 2001, and was thrown
the following error trying to boot to single-user
(transcribed by hand):
src/sys/kern/kern_sync.c:385 sleeping with "eventhandler"
locked from src/sys/kern/subr_eventhandler:159
This came up immedia
* Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010602 18:46] wrote:
> Was it determined that the fsck corruption problems which were seen
> with fsck after the introduction of the dirpref changes do not affect
> RELENG_4? I haven't seen any MFC of changes to the RELENG_4 fsck
> code, and I'm kind of worrie
Was it determined that the fsck corruption problems which were seen
with fsck after the introduction of the dirpref changes do not affect
RELENG_4? I haven't seen any MFC of changes to the RELENG_4 fsck
code, and I'm kind of worried now that I've reverted my current system
back to RELENG_4 :-)
K
On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 09:28:57PM +0900, Seigo Tanimura wrote:
> David> It would also be nice to get a timeline on the commit schedule for this.
> Test of 2 weeks should be enough, followed by commit in 15 June.
I request that this be on hold until we actually get -current Alphas
usable again.
hi,
> On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 12:22:03 -0500
> "David W. Chapman Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
dwcjr> I wouldn't mind, but what exactly does pim do and do you need both pim6dd
dwcjr> and pim6sd?
pim6[ds]d are an IPv6 mutlicast routing daemon. pim6dd is for dense
mode and pim6sd is for spar
I wouldn't mind, but what exactly does pim do and do you need both pim6dd
and pim6sd?
- Original Message -
From: "Hajimu UMEMOTO" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 11:38 AM
Subject: usr.sbin/pim6[sd]d will be removed soon.
> H
Hi,
I heared from itojun that usr.sbin/pim6[sd]d has non-BSD license and
does not allow fee-based redistribution. So, I will remove them from
the tree soon. NetBSD was already done.
Could someone please make them ports? ftp.kame.net:~ftp/pub/kame/misc
has pim6[sd]-*.tar.gz.
--
Hajimu UMEMOTO
Hi,
It seems that something is wrong with sscanf(3) in -current - in
some cases it may cause SIGBUS. I failed to reproduce the
problem on 4-STABLE, so it is a -current specific bug. Attached
please find small showcase that exposes the bug in question
and a backtrace after SIGBUS.
Please fix.
-M
