From owner-freebsd-java@freebsd.org Wed Mar 15 17:08:12 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2220DD0E3EA for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 17:08:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rb@gid.co.uk) Received: from mx0.gid.co.uk (mx0.gid.co.uk [194.32.164.250]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD5D6B5B for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 17:08:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rb@gid.co.uk) Received: from [194.32.164.15] ([194.32.164.15]) by mx0.gid.co.uk (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id v2FH89aT073328; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 17:08:09 GMT (envelope-from rb@gid.co.uk) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: Needle in the haystack: same Java code on two identical machines, one passes one fails From: rb@gid.co.uk In-Reply-To: <68644224DA0DE64CA5A49838ED219A0425C0F181@DEFTHW99EJ5MSX.ww902.siemens.net> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 17:08:09 +0000 Cc: "freebsd-java@freebsd.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <68644224DA0DE64CA5A49838ED219A0425C0F0EA@DEFTHW99EJ5MSX.ww902.siemens.net> <68644224DA0DE64CA5A49838ED219A0425C0F181@DEFTHW99EJ5MSX.ww902.siemens.net> To: "Osipov, Michael" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 17:08:12 -0000 > On 15 Mar 2017, at 15:59, Osipov, Michael = wrote: >=20 >> Hi, >>=20 >>=20 >>> On 15 Mar 2017, at 14:50, Osipov, Michael = >> wrote: >>>=20 >>> Hi folks, >>>=20 >>> I am currently experiencing a stdio issue on a FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE = box >> at work where >>> another, identical box, works flawlessly as well as other test boxes = in >> a VM or on real >>> hardware from 9.3-STABLE to 11.0-STABLE. >>>=20 >>> Let's stick to the two identical boxes at work for now, both are two >> identical HPE >>> servers (Xeon CPUs, RAM 4 GiB) running 10.3-STABLE, both base = systems >> are >>> configured the same way. Software from ports installed is slightly >> different. >>>=20 >>> faulty box: >>> FreeBSD blnn719x.ww004.siemens.net 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE = #0 >> r310805: Fri Dec 30 11:29:53 CET 2016 >> root@blnn719x.ww004.siemens.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BLNN719X i386 >>>=20 >>> working box: >>> FreeBSD blnn714x.ww004.siemens.net 10.3-STABLE FreeBSD 10.3-STABLE = #0 >> r310632: Tue Dec 27 18:58:32 CET 2016 >> root@blnn714x.ww004.siemens.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BLNN714X i386 = [etc] >>=20 >> Well at a quick look, there are changes between r310632 and r310805 = that >> might explain what you are seeing. >=20 > Are you certain? I checked both logs and the diff between these two = revisions. > All I see is HyperV changes from Microsoft and a few changes to Intel = NICs. >=20 > Is there anything particular you are pointing at? No, but that=E2=80=99s the only obvious difference between your two = setups so you should at least eliminate that from your enquiries. > Michael >=20 -- Bob Bishop rb@gid.co.uk