--
>>> Rebuilding the temporary build tree
--
>>> stage 1: bootstrap tools
--
>>> stage 2: cleaning up the object tree
> cc1: warnings being treated as errors
> /usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_mount.c: In function `checkdirs':
> /usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_mount.c:1141: warning: implicit declaration of function
>`vrefcnt'
Oops, I commited this file before I commited a dependency. Please cvsup
again. Specifically, you need the
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
/usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_mount.c: In function `checkdirs':
/usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_mount.c:1141: warning: implicit declaration of function `vrefcnt'
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 12:06:45AM +, attila! wrote:
>
> However, I do object to GNU's heavy handed removal of a
> flag which is in extensive use. I don't have a problem
> with the new syntax, but leave the old one intact
>
>-k, --key=POS1[,POS2]
> s
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Evans)
> Date: Wed 25 Sep, 2002
> Subject: Re: Who broke sort(1) ?
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Peter Wemm wrote:
>
> A 1991 draft version is still available at:
>
> http://www.funet.fi/pub/doc/posix/posix
Nice directory listing.
s/http/ftp/ and s/www/ftp/ and I
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Mike Silbersack wrote:
> Yep, STRIP= was the necessary trick, I didn't realize that install -s
> meant strip. :)
>
> As to your patch... it turns out that I wasn't using it. I've been
> testing with make buildkernel, which uses the copy of gcc built by your
> last buildworl
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Garrett Wollman wrote:
> > < said:
> >
> > > Closed payware standards do not count as 'fair warning'. I still have
> > > never been able to see a posix standard.
> >
> > Go to a library. Or go to http://www.opengroup.org/ and register for
> > free on-lin
Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:00:45 -0700
> "Crist J. Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Not too sure about that. Now I'm getting SIGSEGV again,
>
> You are right. There was a stupid mistake in the latest version, sorry.
> Could you try yet another patch?
>
> http://people
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Wemm)
> Date: Tue 24 Sep, 2002
> Subject: Re: Who broke sort(1) ?
> How many successful widely distributed OS's are there that does not allow
> sort +N as a numeric argument by default? (I'm sure somebody can dig up
> an obscure linux distribution or some microco
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Garrett Wollman)
> Date: Tue 24 Sep, 2002
> Subject: Re: Who broke sort(1) ?
> I don't object to maintaining backwards compatibility for a few more
> releases (even if the application writers are the ones at fault),
Umm, their "fault" may simply have been that they wro
On 2002-09-24 13:30, Peter Wemm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
> party scripts that use +n syntax.
And ports. Lots of them. Dozens of them :(
I just noticed that textproc/ispell doesn't work anymore for me.
More will appe
--
>>> Rebuilding the temporary build tree
--
>>> stage 1: bootstrap tools
--
>>> stage 2: cleaning up the object tree
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Fenner)
> Date: Tue 24 Sep, 2002
> Subject: Re: Who broke sort(1) ?
> When's the first time the FreeBSD sort(1) man page mentioned that this
> syntax was deprecated? Can we at least start from there?
I echo this sentiment. Ideally, two 4.x releases would documen
Garrett Wollman wrote:
> < said:
>
> > Closed payware standards do not count as 'fair warning'. I still have
> > never been able to see a posix standard.
>
> Go to a library. Or go to http://www.opengroup.org/ and register for
> free on-line access.
The 1992 version hasn't been available onli
Garrett Wollman wrote:
> < s
aid:
>
> > When's the first time the FreeBSD sort(1) man page mentioned that this
> > syntax was deprecated? Can we at least start from there?
>
> It does not appear to have ever been properly documented.
>
> I don't object to maintaining backwards compatibilit
At 6:02 PM -0400 9/24/02, Garrett Wollman wrote:
>< said:
>
> > When's the first time the FreeBSD sort(1) man page mentioned that
> > this syntax was deprecated? Can we at least start from there?
>
>It does not appear to have ever been properly documented.
>
>I don't object to maintaining backw
I think a lot of people would be happier if we could maintain backwards
compatability (and document the fact that they're extremely obsolete)
for a few more releases. Despite the fact that the main UNIX reference
that I use was published in 1984, I don't actually want everything to
stay the same
> Nope, still getting it.
I was able to reproduce the crash with your config file and unpatched
GCC, however crash does not happen when I use the patch. Are you using
make buildkernel or old config/make method?
>
> options IPSEC_ESP
>
> That is killing it. If I comment out that option,
< said:
> Closed payware standards do not count as 'fair warning'. I still have
> never been able to see a posix standard.
Go to a library. Or go to http://www.opengroup.org/ and register for
free on-line access.
-GAWollman
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe fr
< said:
> When's the first time the FreeBSD sort(1) man page mentioned that this
> syntax was deprecated? Can we at least start from there?
It does not appear to have ever been properly documented.
I don't object to maintaining backwards compatibility for a few more
releases (even if the appli
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 14:39:01 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Bill Fenner wrote:
> >
> > Here's my suggested fix:
> > +}
>
> Try something like this:
If you want something like this, here is less broken way:
--- lib/posixver.c.bak Fri Jun 7 11:24:45 2002
+++ lib/posixver.c Wed Sep 25 01:4
Bill Fenner wrote:
>
> Here's my suggested fix:
> @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
> +/*
> + * Tell GNU sort(1) to implement the obsolete +1 -0 syntax even though
> + * it has been removed from the version of POSIX that the rest of
> + * the system conforms to.
> + */
> +int posix2_version(void) {
> + return
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 16:07:39 -0500 (CDT)
> Mike Silbersack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:05:08PM -0500, Mike Silbersack wrote:
> > > > Ok, I fixed lorder.sh, and
"Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 13:30:11 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
> >
> > Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
> > party scripts that use +n syntax.
> >
> > I am most unhappy with this change. :-(
>
> It will be possible to have both va
Garrett Wollman wrote:
> < said:
>
> > Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
> > party scripts that use +n syntax.
>
> > I am most unhappy with this change. :-(
>
> The time to complain about it was back in 1992when the old syntax was
> labeled ``deprecated'
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 16:07:39 -0500 (CDT)
Mike Silbersack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:05:08PM -0500, Mike Silbersack wrote:
> > > Ok, I fixed lorder.sh, and made gcc again from clean with
> > > Alexander's patch. No
>It's not like people didn't have nine years' advance warning to fix
>their scripts.
When's the first time the FreeBSD sort(1) man page mentioned that this
syntax was deprecated? Can we at least start from there?
Bill
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 13:59:02 -0700, Bill Fenner wrote:
>
> >Please, no. They do the right thing.
>
> I guess there are varying definitions of what the right thing is.
I mean just:
1) We all agree targeting POSIX, so POSIX conformance is the right thing.
2) If we use _POSIX2_VERSION 2001* in
>Until "sh", "make", "tar", and so on also drop behaviours that are
>not specified by POSIX, it's really silly to make "sort" drop them.
It's not that the +x/-y argument syntax is not specified - it's that
it's specifically disallowed. (I disagree with that restriction, but
let's at least have
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:05:08PM -0500, Mike Silbersack wrote:
> > Ok, I fixed lorder.sh, and made gcc again from clean with Alexander's
> > patch. No change, I still see the same segmentation fault. Alexander,
> > how can I easily build gcc with
< said:
> Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
> party scripts that use +n syntax.
> I am most unhappy with this change. :-(
The time to complain about it was back in 1992when the old syntax was
labeled ``deprecated'' by P1003.2, or in 1999 when the revisio
>Please, no. They do the right thing.
I guess there are varying definitions of what the right thing is.
I don't think it's widely known that the +/- syntax was obsoleted.
I am vaguely a standards weenie and I didn't know.
Bill
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 11:43:22AM -0400, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:00:45 -0700
> "Crist J. Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Not too sure about that. Now I'm getting SIGSEGV again,
>
> You are right. There was a stupid mistake in the latest version, sorry.
> Could y
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 13:43:08 -0700, Bill Fenner wrote:
>
> Here's my suggested fix:
Please, no. They do the right thing. You can bypass it setting
_POSIX2_VERSION=199209 in the environment.
--
Andrey A. Chernov
http://ache.pp.ru/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsub
I keep getting my dmesg flooded with this:
ACPI-1046: *** Error: AcpiEvGpeDispatch: No handler or method for
GPE[9], disabling event
ACPI-1046: *** Error: AcpiEvGpeDispatch: No handler or method for
GPE[9], disabling event
And it feels kind of warm, is there a way to force the fans on? I
tho
Peter Wemm wrote:
> Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
> party scripts that use +n syntax.
>
> I am most unhappy with this change. :-(
I'll say it again: unconditionally complying POSIX is an impediment
to getting real work done. 8-(.
I would be very hap
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 13:30:11 -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
>
> Oh man, this is going to suck. There are thousands and thousands of third
> party scripts that use +n syntax.
>
> I am most unhappy with this change. :-(
It will be possible to have both variants, but +N is valid filename per
POSIX
I left my FreeBSD-current workstation at home running for a few hours,
and returned to find the configured "snake" saver running. When I
pressed "Shift" to get the screen saver to stop, the console went
blank and stopped updating. I broke into DDB and used "panic" to stop
everything (mostly a co
Here's my suggested fix:
stash% pwd
/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/sort
stash% cvs diff -uN
cvs diff: Diffing .
Index: posixver.c
===
RCS file: posixver.c
diff -N posixver.c
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -
+++ posixver.c 24 Sep 200
Tim Robbins wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 01:43:38PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 10:17:41PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> > >
> > > flat# date | sort +5n
> > > sort: open failed: +5n: No such file or directory
> > >
> > > This breaks the build in libncurses...
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 22:32:01 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
>
> Please send your fix to our ncurses
> maintainer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) too for commiting.
Not needed, I use _POSIX_VERSION=199209 environment workaround in
lib/libncurses/Makefile.
--
Andrey A. Chernov
http://ache.pp.ru/
To
Just a quick scan turns up these suspects in need of revision:
/usr/src/etc/security
/usr/src/etc/periodic/daily/440.status-named
/usr/src/etc/periodic/monthly/200.accounting
/usr/src/etc/periodic/security/100.chksetuid
/usr/src/etc/periodic/security/800.loginfail
/usr/src/etc/periodic/security/9
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:24:38PM +0100, Fergus Cameron wrote:
> i'm pretty new to current so perhaps this in naive but are there any
> point releases for testing --- i.e. releases that are known to build
> properly?
The Developer Preview #2 should be out sometime in the next month or
two. Asi
You may already know this, but the GNU sort also check for the environment
variable _POSIX2_VERSION, and according to the docs setting it to 199209
will revert to the old style usage (and unbreak world I am guessing)
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:05:08PM -0500, Mike Silbersack wrote:
> Ok, I fixed lorder.sh, and made gcc again from clean with Alexander's
> patch. No change, I still see the same segmentation fault. Alexander,
> how can I easily build gcc with full debugging symbols? That might make
> the backtr
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, David Wolfskill wrote:
> >building static cc_int library
> >sort: open failed: +1: No such file or directory
> >sort: open failed: +1: No such file or directory
> >ranlib libcc_int.a
>
> >Any chance that's causing a problem?
>
> To fix that (regardless of sort), s/sort +1/so
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Marc Recht wrote:
> > That's an odd set of things to have break in concert. The UFS options
> > should not affect devfs at all. That said, your best bet is probably to
> > turn off sets of related options until you figure out what the source is.
> > Obvious candidates would
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 05:46:15 -0700, walt wrote:
> This line in /usr/src/contrib/ncurses/include/MKkey_defs.sh seems to
> be the fix:
>
> sed -e 's/[ ]\+//g' < $DATA |sort -n -k 6 >$data
I forward your fix to ncurses author. Please send your fix to our ncurses
maintainer ([EMAIL PROT
> That's an odd set of things to have break in concert. The UFS options
> should not affect devfs at all. That said, your best bet is probably to
> turn off sets of related options until you figure out what the source is.
> Obvious candidates would be to turn off the UFS options as a set, GEOM,
> >options UFS_ACL
>
> This is a major suspect. Have you read what it does ?
Of course. It has been working for weeks..
>
> >options GEOM
>
> This I can almost guarantee you, is not the culprit.
You're right.
The smbus/ic/iic/iicsmb stuff is what breaks the kernel for me.
Mar
Mike Silbersack wrote:
> Thanks to the wonderful sort breakage, I'm seeing this if I touch
> cppmacro.c and make again:
>
> building static cc_int library
> sort: open failed: +1: No such file or directory
> sort: open failed: +1: No such file or directory
This is easily fixed by patching /us
That's an odd set of things to have break in concert. The UFS options
should not affect devfs at all. That said, your best bet is probably to
turn off sets of related options until you figure out what the source is.
Obvious candidates would be to turn off the UFS options as a set, GEOM,
and the
pkg_add coredumps when installing dependencies from remote. This is
really annoying because you have to manually track down dependencies and
install them (say, for a critical package like cvsup). This has been
reported multiple times and is 100% repeatable. It's been broken for a
few months (ev
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marc Recht
writes:
>--=.t8Cw0UW_4O(CPO
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Hi!
>
>Something checked-in yesterday broke the kernel badly.. Some of these
>options or a combination of these break the kernel badly. If they're
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Garrett Wollman
writes:
>Anyone experiencing this problem might want to try the following
>(beware cut&paste). I still don't understand why it is that I don't
>see it. Is there a hidden build dependency? (I.e., does `sort' need
>to be added to the list of build-
Hi!
Something checked-in yesterday broke the kernel badly.. Some of these
options or a combination of these break the kernel badly. If they're activatet then
not all devices are created by devfs (ttv* is missing..).
Even without devfs ttv* isn't working...
Commenting this out of my config fixed
>
> Thanks to the wonderful sort breakage, I'm seeing this if I touch
> cppmacro.c and make again:
>
> ===> cc_int
> cc -O -pipe -mcpu=pentiumpro -DIN_GCC -DHAVE_CONFIG_H
> -DPREFIX=\"/usr\"-I/usr/obj/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc_int/../cc_tools
> -I/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc_int/../cc_tools
> -I/
On Sun, 22 Sep 2002, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Sep 2002 18:51:14 -0500 (CDT)
> Mike Silbersack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm seeing the segfault in the kernel make depend step, just as
> > someone else reported.
>
> OK, could you please try the patch at
> http://people.freebsd.
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:52:10 -0500 (CDT)
> Mike Silbersack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Do you want me to try your first patch? I never got a chance to test
> > it.(And no longer have a copy of it, either.)
> No, there is a bug in the patch
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:00:45 -0700
"Crist J. Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not too sure about that. Now I'm getting SIGSEGV again,
You are right. There was a stupid mistake in the latest version, sorry.
Could you try yet another patch?
http://people.freebsd.org/~kan/gcc-cpp.diff
--
Alex
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:52:10 -0500 (CDT)
Mike Silbersack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you want me to try your first patch? I never got a chance to test
> it.(And no longer have a copy of it, either.)
No, there is a bug in the patch you tested. Could you please try again
with an updated patc
--
>>> Rebuilding the temporary build tree
--
>>> stage 1: bootstrap tools
--
>>> stage 2: cleaning up the object tree
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 17:22:36 +0300
Vallo Kallaste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 09:47:44AM -0400, Wesley Morgan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I have built XFree86 at least 3 times in the past week, all with
> > varying levels of optimization, from -O to -O3 and ALWAYS
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 09:47:44AM -0400, Wesley Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have built XFree86 at least 3 times in the past week, all with varying
> levels of optimization, from -O to -O3 and ALWAYS with -march=pentium3.
> All of the builds succeeded, although I had stability problems
i'm pretty new to current so perhaps this in naive but are there any
point releases for testing --- i.e. releases that are known to build
properly?
the reason i ask is that i've got a problem and am not a coder but
essentially have no way to know whether it is worth reporting; whether it
is fixe
I have built XFree86 at least 3 times in the past week, all with varying
levels of optimization, from -O to -O3 and ALWAYS with -march=pentium3.
All of the builds succeeded, although I had stability problems with -O2
and above. Are you _certain_ this is a compiler bug?
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Vallo
Garrett Wollman wrote:
> Anyone experiencing this problem might want to try the following
> (beware cut&paste). I still don't understand why it is that I don't
> see it...
If you don't see errors while building libc or libncurses just do
a 'make clean' in those directories first.
>
> I'm too
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 12:29:35 +1000, Tim Robbins wrote:
>
> A workaround might be to #undef _POSIX2_VERSION after #include'ing
> in posixver.c but I don't think that would be correct. It's probably better
Removing compatibility with +pos f.e. they just try to confirm POSIX,
because +N can b
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:57:09 -0400, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> Anyone experiencing this problem might want to try the following
> (beware cut&paste). I still don't understand why it is that I don't
> see it. Is there a hidden build dependency? (I.e., does `sort' need
> to be added to the list
Kris Kennaway wrote:
> ...I expect the problem will be resolved by those who have already
> said they'll resolve it ;)
I obviously missed that discussion. I don't want to pester people
about things that they are already working on, so is there somewhere
besides the -current and cvs mailing list
--
>>> Rebuilding the temporary build tree
--
>>> stage 1: bootstrap tools
--
>>> stage 2: cleaning up the object tree
71 matches
Mail list logo
