From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 19 19:03:39 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2079516A4CF for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:03:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mailserv1.neuroflux.com (mailserv1.neuroflux.com [204.228.228.92]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B75A143D2F for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:03:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ryans@gamersimpact.com) Received: (qmail 91519 invoked by uid 89); 19 Oct 2004 19:11:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO www2.neuroflux.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 Oct 2004 19:11:23 -0000 Received: from 208.4.77.15 (SquirrelMail authenticated user ryans@gamersimpact.com); by www2.neuroflux.com with HTTP; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 13:11:23 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <53526.208.4.77.15.1098213083.squirrel@208.4.77.15> In-Reply-To: <16757.25445.575976.716018@ran.psg.com> References: <16756.47081.304613.940742@ran.psg.com> <20041019134037.GC1072@green.homeunix.org> <16757.16950.231007.263153@ran.psg.com> <20041019165417.GE1072@green.homeunix.org> <16757.18685.756183.845077@ran.psg.com> <20041019172426.GF1072@green.homeunix.org> <53475.208.4.77.15.1098212379.squirrel@208.4.77.15> <16757.25445.575976.716018@ran.psg.com> Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 13:11:23 -0600 (MDT) From: "Ryan Sommers" To: "Randy Bush" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.3a X-Mailer: SquirrelMail/1.4.3a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal cc: Ryan Sommers cc: FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: trap 12 with preempt (and ule) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:03:39 -0000 Randy Bush said: >> I wouldn't say ULE is completely instable. > > no, it seems stable on three systems here. i does seem > very ill-advised to combine it with preemption. and > bsd4 seems compatible with preemption. This is true. I don't use preemption and the mailserver is from before preemption was added to CURRENT I think. -- Ryan Sommers ryans@gamersimpact.com