Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 11:30:30 -0400 From: Janos Dohanics <web@3dresearch.com> To: Michael Powell <nightrecon@hotmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: firefox-4.0.1,1 crashes Message-ID: <20110509113030.3d967a25.web@3dresearch.com> In-Reply-To: <iq85bn$uj1$1@dough.gmane.org> References: <20110506093157.4b34ce22.web@3dresearch.com> <87zkmzjyfe.wl%h.skuhra@gmail.com> <20110508140044.77e4137c.web@3dresearch.com> <BANLkTimHHvsdWQKB8O=_ArGccVgYKXWu-g@mail.gmail.com> <iq6oo1$veb$1@dough.gmane.org> <20110509030247.9c7945cb.web@3dresearch.com> <iq85bn$uj1$1@dough.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 09 May 2011 03:37:28 -0400 Michael Powell <nightrecon@hotmail.com> wrote: > Janos Dohanics wrote: > > [snip] > >> > > >> > And it's not a requirement. I've never seen that issue, or > >> > enabled the fix although firefox is my primary browser. > >> > >> These options are present in the GENERIC kernel and you probably > >> did not remove them. My guess is the OP did and never realized it. > >> At least that's how it is in Release, if Stable is different I > >> wouldn't know. > [snip] > > > > Actually, I build custom kernels, and I must have deleted the option > > P1003_1B_SEMAPHORES by accident. > > Yes. Been there done that myself. Before Firefox 4 it didn't matter. > > > FreeBSD 7.3-RELEASE Release Notes says that "FreeBSD now supports > > POSIX semaphores (P1003_1B_SEMAPHORES kernel option) by default" - > > I should assume then that the option P1003_1B_SEMAPHORES has been > > included by default in all 8.x versions, correct? > > > > Yes. A snip from GENERIC: > > options SYSVSHM # SYSV-style shared > memory options SYSVMSG # SYSV-style > message queues options SYSVSEM # > SYSV-style semaphores options P1003_1B_SEMAPHORES # > POSIX-style semaphores options _KPOSIX_PRIORITY_SCHEDULING # > POSIX P1003_1B real-time extensions > > Whenever a userland app gives problems it's very easy to fixate on > the app being broken, and most of the time that is indeed the case. > When it's complaining about some kind of support library or function > missing, or throwing an error, the next thing to look for is the > source for the error in whatever upstream dependency. In this > particular case the location of the complaint just happened to be > something which is in the default kernel. This is why I knew you had > built a custom kernel and removed this. Like I said, been there done > that. > > -Mike Thanks for your help - so many ways to mess up... :) -- Janos Dohanics
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110509113030.3d967a25.web>