On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Matthew Fleming wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>>> On 2010-Oct-20 10:50:38 +0400, KOT MATPOCKuH wrote:
> I fixed it with attached patch.
Omg... Why You are using st
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>> On 2010-Oct-20 10:50:38 +0400, KOT MATPOCKuH wrote:
I fixed it with attached patch.
>>>Omg... Why You are using strcmp, but not strncmp(fs, "zfs", strlen("zfs"))?
>>
>> Can you
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>> On 2010-Oct-20 10:50:38 +0400, KOT MATPOCKuH wrote:
I fixed it with attached patch.
>>>Omg... Why You are using strcmp, but not strncmp(fs, "zfs", strlen("zfs"))?
>>
>> Can you
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2010-Oct-20 10:50:38 +0400, KOT MATPOCKuH wrote:
>>> I fixed it with attached patch.
>>Omg... Why You are using strcmp, but not strncmp(fs, "zfs", strlen("zfs"))?
>
> Can you explain why you think it should be strncmp() please.
I'd say t
On 2010-Oct-20 10:50:38 +0400, KOT MATPOCKuH wrote:
>> I fixed it with attached patch.
>Omg... Why You are using strcmp, but not strncmp(fs, "zfs", strlen("zfs"))?
Can you explain why you think it should be strncmp() please.
--
Peter Jeremy
pgpYP2SOEntZd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Oct 19, 2010, at 9:38 PM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> On 20.10.2010 2:33, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>>> What about the attached patch? I'm going to give it a swirl soon. The
>>> difference is that it tests whether dev begins with /dev/.
>>
>> Interesting. I've been thinking about this too, but
On 20.10.2010 10:50, KOT MATPOCKuH wrote:
> Hello!
>
>> I fixed it with attached patch.
> Omg... Why You are using strcmp, but not strncmp(fs, "zfs", strlen("zfs"))?
:)
Just because it is not first access to the fs variable in this function.
And it is already checked with strcmp.
--
WBR, Andre
Hello!
> I fixed it with attached patch.
Omg... Why You are using strcmp, but not strncmp(fs, "zfs", strlen("zfs"))?
--
MATPOCKuH
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send
On 20.10.2010 2:33, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>> What about the attached patch? I'm going to give it a swirl soon. The
>> difference is that it tests whether dev begins with /dev/.
>
> Interesting. I've been thinking about this too, but isn't
> exactly fool-proof. When devfs is the root file syste
On Oct 19, 2010, at 2:21 PM, Xin LI wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 10/19/10 08:49, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 19, 2010, at 7:55 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
>>
>>> On 19.10.2010 09:03, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> Mounting from (...) failed with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 10/19/10 08:49, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 7:55 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
>
>> On 19.10.2010 09:03, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
Mounting from (...) failed with error 19
On boot. The system is using pure ZF
On 19.10.2010 03:50, Xin LI wrote:
Escaping to boot loader prompt, and load old kernel, old opensolaris.ko,
old zfs.ko doesn't work.
I think you forgot to load zpool.cache:
load -t /boot/zfs/zpool.cache /boot/zfs/zpool.cache
___
freebsd-current@freebsd
On my sparc64 system with today kernel I also got this problem.
With old kernel system boots properly.
boot -sv log attached.
--
MATPOCKuH
boot-sv.log
Description: Binary data
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailm
On Oct 19, 2010, at 7:55 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> On 19.10.2010 09:03, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
>>> Mounting from (...) failed with error 19
>>>
>>> On boot. The system is using pure ZFS setup. It seems that 19 means
>>> ENODEV but according to the dmesg the device do exist.
>>
>> Y
On 19.10.2010 19:43, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>> Yes, i have the same problem.
>
> Can you both boot verbose and send me the output.
> Also, please boot with -a and show me the console
> output, as well as the output of the '?' command.
It is ZFS-only system and I have this line in /boot/loader.co
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:03 PM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> On 19.10.2010 3:50, Xin LI wrote:
>> With latest kernel I got:
>>
>> Mounting from (...) failed with error 19
>>
>> On boot. The system is using pure ZFS setup. It seems that 19 means
>> ENODEV but according to the dmesg the device
On 19.10.2010 09:03, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
>> Mounting from (...) failed with error 19
>>
>> On boot. The system is using pure ZFS setup. It seems that 19 means
>> ENODEV but according to the dmesg the device do exist.
>
> Yes, i have the same problem.
I fixed it with attached patch.
-
On 19.10.2010 3:50, Xin LI wrote:
> With latest kernel I got:
>
> Mounting from (...) failed with error 19
>
> On boot. The system is using pure ZFS setup. It seems that 19 means
> ENODEV but according to the dmesg the device do exist.
Yes, i have the same problem.
--
WBR, Andrey V. El
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
With latest kernel I got:
Mounting from (...) failed with error 19
On boot. The system is using pure ZFS setup. It seems that 19 means
ENODEV but according to the dmesg the device do exist.
At the beginning I thought it was because
19 matches
Mail list logo
