From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 27 20:01:14 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from [127.0.0.1] (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 550A1106564A; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 20:01:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org) From: Jung-uk Kim To: Bernhard Froehlich Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:00:55 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <201106271140.36038.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <9721f5a37d94e11433cef97569570eb6@bluelife.at> In-Reply-To: <9721f5a37d94e11433cef97569570eb6@bluelife.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <201106271600.57713.jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Matt , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, George Kontostanos Subject: Re: virtualbox-ose 4.0.8 fails X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 20:01:14 -0000 On Monday 27 June 2011 03:42 pm, Bernhard Froehlich wrote: > On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 11:40:31 -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > On Saturday 25 June 2011 10:28 am, Bernhard Froehlich wrote: > >> On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:11:27 -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > >> > On Friday 24 June 2011 02:58 pm, George Kontostanos wrote: > >> >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Jung-uk Kim > >> >> > >> > > >> > wrote: > >> >> >> Any ideas regarding the virtualbox itself ? > >> >> > > >> >> > I am rebuilding world/kernel now. �After that, I'll rebuild > >> >> > virtualbox-ose and try to fix it unless someone beat me to > >> >> > it. > >> >> > > >> >> > :-) > >> >> > > >> >> > Jung-uk Kim > >> >> > >> >> Brilliant !!! > >> > > >> > Please try this patch: > >> > > >> > http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/patch-src-VBox-Main-src-server > >> >-fr eebsd-HostHardwareFreeBSD.cpp > >> > > >> > Just drop this in ports/emulators/virtualbox-ose/files and > >> > rebuild. > >> > >> Thanks a lot, they look good. Do you agree that those two > >> patches are licensed under MIT License so that i can push them > >> upstream? > > > > Yes, of course. Please feel free. > > Shouldn't the changes only be done for __FreeBSD_version >= 900038 > ? It's also not fully correct because the version wasn't bumped for > the CAM changes but it's the best we can get. > > The same is true for the cpuset_t change but the version wasn't > bumped either. > > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=223081 > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=222813 To be absolutely correct, yes, we need to bump __FreeBSD_version first. However, it is very close to feature freeze and I don't think anybody wants to do that ATM. For -CURRENT, I don't think it really matters as I said earlier: http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201106241352.14262.jkim Now, are you going to "fix" __FreeBSD_version >= 700000 in these files, too? ;-) Jung-uk Kim