On 2013-01-15 04:53, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
So I updated my FreeBSD machine to 9.1-RELEASE in the hope of getting
past the ctfconvert problem that causes a build of 10-CURRENT to say:
ERROR: ctfconvert: failed to initialize DWARF: Unimplemented code at
[dwarf_init_attr(400)]
while compiling every
On 2013-01-15 00:57, George Mitchell wrote:
So I updated my FreeBSD machine to 9.1-RELEASE in the hope of getting
past the ctfconvert problem that causes a build of 10-CURRENT to say:
ERROR: ctfconvert: failed to initialize DWARF: Unimplemented code at
[dwarf_init_attr(400)]
while compiling eve
So I updated my FreeBSD machine to 9.1-RELEASE in the hope of getting
past the ctfconvert problem that causes a build of 10-CURRENT to say:
ERROR: ctfconvert: failed to initialize DWARF: Unimplemented code at
[dwarf_init_attr(400)]
while compiling every kernel source file. Then I checked out he
BTW, the brokenness can be seen in the fact that the PID does not
change across execs, but it seems to affect output as well as I was not able to
see syscall output from write when it printed out "Executing" as shown in the
snippet below.
Thanks,
-Garrett
On Jan 14, 2013, at 6:48 PM, Ga
I tried using ktrace on a kernel compiled a week ago, and it appears to
not be following forks like it should on amd64:
# ktrace -d ./regress -l
rename_file move_files_into_dir move_file_from_dir_to_file
move_file_from_dir_to_existing_file move_file_from_dir_to_existing_dir
move_file_f
On 01/14/13 19:21, Steven Hartland wrote:
- Original Message - From: "George Mitchell"
To:
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 11:57 PM
Subject: ctfconvert again
So I updated my FreeBSD machine to 9.1-RELEASE in the hope of getting
past the ctfconvert problem that causes a build of 10-CU
- Original Message -
From: "Freddie Cash"
The following built without any issues, including GENERIC and a custom
kernel. I was pleasantly surprised that it was so easy to update from
9.0-RELEASE to 10.0-CURRENT. I was expecting a lot more manual fiddling
and twiddling.
To be clear
On 01/14/13 18:57, George Mitchell wrote:
So I updated my FreeBSD machine to 9.1-RELEASE in the hope of getting
past the ctfconvert problem that causes a build of 10-CURRENT to say:
ERROR: ctfconvert: failed to initialize DWARF: Unimplemented code at
[dwarf_init_attr(400)]
while compiling every
- Original Message -
From: "George Mitchell"
To:
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 11:57 PM
Subject: ctfconvert again
So I updated my FreeBSD machine to 9.1-RELEASE in the hope of getting
past the ctfconvert problem that causes a build of 10-CURRENT to say:
ERROR: ctfconvert: failed
The following built without any issues, including GENERIC and a custom
kernel. I was pleasantly surprised that it was so easy to update from
9.0-RELEASE to 10.0-CURRENT. I was expecting a lot more manual fiddling
and twiddling.
[fcash@nexus2 /usr/src]$ uname -a
FreeBSD nexus2.sd73.bc.ca 10.0-C
So I updated my FreeBSD machine to 9.1-RELEASE in the hope of getting
past the ctfconvert problem that causes a build of 10-CURRENT to say:
ERROR: ctfconvert: failed to initialize DWARF: Unimplemented code at
[dwarf_init_attr(400)]
while compiling every kernel source file. Then I checked out
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 04:39:17PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> This patch adds a new -r flag to dump the resource usage information (what
> you
> would get from getrusage() or wait()) for a given process. Sample output:
>
> % procstat -r $$
> PID COMM TYPE
This patch adds a new -r flag to dump the resource usage information (what you
would get from getrusage() or wait()) for a given process. Sample output:
% procstat -r $$
PID COMM TYPE VALUE
1428 tcsh user time 00
On Saturday, November 24, 2012 10:01:39 am Attilio Rao wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 3:08 AM, Ryan Stone wrote:
> > Today I saw a spurious witness warning for "acquiring duplicate lock of
> > same type". The root cause is that when running mtx_destroy on a spinlock
> > that is held by the curr
Good to know thank you! :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 06:18:34 -0600, wrote:
Hello :-)
I was wondering if there is a hardware accelerated Jail using
Virtualization CPU extensions in BSD or everything is done in Kernel
by software? SUSE is advertising their "light virtualization" (no
hardware emulation) I was wondering if BSD h
Hello :-)
I was wondering if there is a hardware accelerated Jail using
Virtualization CPU extensions in BSD or everything is done in Kernel
by software? SUSE is advertising their "light virtualization" (no
hardware emulation) I was wondering if BSD has this capabilities too
;-) What would be bene
17 matches
Mail list logo