From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Nov 17 19:35:52 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B410537B401 for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 19:35:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.netcologne.de (smtp.netcologne.de [194.8.194.112]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C97043E77 for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 19:35:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tmseck-lists@netcologne.de) Received: from mail.tmseck.homedns.org (xdsl-213-168-118-186.netcologne.de [213.168.118.186]) by smtp.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E0D98661D for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 04:35:47 +0100 (MET) Received: by mail.tmseck.homedns.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id D2374286A5; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 04:35:44 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 04:35:44 +0100 From: Thomas Seck To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: -STABLE was stable for long time Message-ID: <20021118033544.GB755@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> Reply-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <20021118023431.60AA1286A5@mail.tmseck.homedns.org> <20021117224133.A23359-100000@hub.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021117224133.A23359-100000@hub.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Organization: private site in Germany X-PGP-KeyID: DF46EE05 X-PGP-Fingerprint: A38F AE66 6B11 6EB9 5D1A B67D 2444 2FE1 DF46 EE05 X-Attribution: tms Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Marc G. Fournier (scrappy@hub.org): > On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Thomas Seck wrote: > > * Marc G. Fournier (scrappy@hub.org): > > > What I'm complaining about is that those that are MFCng to -STABLE seem to > > > be leaving it as "it works on my hardware, so it must work" and drop'ng > > > responsibility for their changes ... > > > > Well, this sounds somewhat familiar to me. But you must agree that the > > situation at your site is hard to reproduce for any developer unless you > > give him or her shell access. > > Actually, when Matt Dillon worked with me on one of the crashes, whenever > it crashed, I'd compress the vmcore for him to ftp down to his server to > work on, as well as the kernel.debug file ... I offered him shell access, > but, in his opinion, it was easier for him to work locally where he > already had his debug environment setup ... > > And I'm willing to make those vmcore's available to anyone that wishes to > debug the problems ... but the only one that has ever step'd up to that > plate *so far* has been Matt ... Well, maybe the problem was not interesting enough (or too difficult to track down). It's a pity but you cannot force an unpaid volunteer into solving a problem he does not think he triggered... > If ppl like me take snapshots periodically of STABLE and pound the hell > out of it in a real life scenario, then the bugs don't get a chance to > pile up ... the overall system *would* stay stable ... Well, why not. The only problem I see (with my sleepy eyes) is how to distinguish HW problems from SW problems under heavy load (i386 HW is of extremely low quality these days, not to mention the thermal issues with today's processors). --Thomas To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message