From owner-freebsd-current Mon Jun 23 22:48:45 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA24712 for current-outgoing; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 22:48:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from veda.is (ubiq.veda.is [193.4.230.60]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA24704 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 22:48:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from adam@localhost) by veda.is (8.8.5/8.7.3) id GAA27564; Tue, 24 Jun 1997 06:17:09 GMT From: Adam David Message-Id: <199706240617.GAA27564@veda.is> Subject: Re: Upping the dmesg buffer In-Reply-To: <199706240358.WAA03879@fredriks-1.pr.mcs.net> from Lars Fredriksen at "Jun 23, 97 10:58:25 pm" To: lars@fredriks-1.pr.mcs.net (Lars Fredriksen) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 06:17:08 +0000 (GMT) Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > You lose it all anyway after a certain amount of system errors have occurred. > > Then the only recourse is scanning old logfiles for the boot messages, if > > those logs have not also been rotated out of existence by then. > > > > dmesg is a convenience but will never cover all needs. > > No but it is a handy debugging tool (and its output is saved in /var/log/dmesg..) > So I think it is a worthwhile investment to make it work. > > Lars I agree with you. Yes, /var/run/dmesg.boot was a great idea, and definitely even more reason for this not to overflow the buffer. -- Adam David