On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 11:55:46PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 11:39:29PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > Jake just checked something in that looks like it may be relevant.
>
> Yes it was. `thediff' on sparc64 is solid.
> Still some ast funkiness on Alpha, but it is n
On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 11:39:29PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > Jake just checked something in that looks like it may be relevant.
>
> Yes it was. `thediff' on sparc64 is solid.
> Still some ast funkiness on Alpha, but it is not so bad as to ma
On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 11:39:29PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Jake just checked something in that looks like it may be relevant.
Yes it was. `thediff' on sparc64 is solid.
Still some ast funkiness on Alpha, but it is not so bad as to make it so
someone cannot get work done on Alpha if they
you are missing kern_thread.c
On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, David O'Brien wrote:
> Not buildable on sparc64:
>
> linking kernel.debug
> procfs_ctl.o: In function `procfs_control':
> procfs_ctl.o(.text+0x56c): undefined reference to `thread_unsuspend'
> init_main.o: In function `proc0_init':
> init_main
You must have something wrong in the MD code that jake added..
I don't do anything in that code or with any allignments
none of these functions have been altered..
Jake said he had it going...
On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 11:02:51PM -0700, David O'Brien
Jake just checked something in that looks like it may be relevant.
On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 11:02:51PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
> > Not buildable on sparc64:
>
> User error. Now I get:
>
> Mounting root from ufs:/dev/ad0a
> WARNING: / was not pro
On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 11:02:51PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
> Not buildable on sparc64:
User error. Now I get:
Mounting root from ufs:/dev/ad0a
WARNING: / was not properly dismounted
panic: trap: memory address not aligned
cpuid = 0; Debugger("panic")
Stopped at Debugger+0x1c: ta
Not buildable on sparc64:
linking kernel.debug
procfs_ctl.o: In function `procfs_control':
procfs_ctl.o(.text+0x56c): undefined reference to `thread_unsuspend'
init_main.o: In function `proc0_init':
init_main.o(.text+0x3a8): undefined reference to `threadinit'
kern_condvar.o: In function `cv_chec
On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> :you said you need more than the two days I said I would be watching
> :for problems over the weekend.. I responded that
> :teh two days is only the time I will have a LOT of time but that even
> :after that time I will still be here in case thin
ok.. but let me know when you have tested it a bit..
David, ifyou want to test this I really suggest that you grab it with
cvsup as a whole rather than doing small patches one at a time...
(check my web page for how to do that..)
Matt, I just did a sync..
On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, David O'Brien wrot
On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 09:36:54PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> I think he means he would like you to give him a little more time
> before comitting. e.g. like comitting July 1 instead of June 29
> (If that's what you mean David, you should just say so).
Sorry, that is what I meant
:you said you need more than the two days I said I would be watching
:for problems over the weekend.. I responded that
:teh two days is only the time I will have a LOT of time but that even
:after that time I will still be here in case things explode.
:
:
:On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, David O'Brien wrot
you said you need more than the two days I said I would be watching
for problems over the weekend.. I responded that
teh two days is only the time I will have a LOT of time but that even
after that time I will still be here in case things explode.
On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, David O'Brien wrote:
> On
On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 08:18:17PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> I won't be absent after that, just busier.
ENOPARSE
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
I won't be absent after that, just busier.
On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 07:50:39PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > Estimated commit time: (assuming current works at that time)
> > will be around 1AM GMT June 29
> > that will be 6PM here in San Francisco
On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 07:50:39PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Estimated commit time: (assuming current works at that time)
> will be around 1AM GMT June 29
> that will be 6PM here in San Francisco.
We need more than 2 days time to test on Alpha and sparc64.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMA
16 matches
Mail list logo
