Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 21:00:47 +0200 From: Henner Heck <Henner.Heck@web.de> To: Steven Hartland <killing@multiplay.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Ronald Klop <ronald-freebsd8@klop.yi.org> Subject: Re: Long delays during boot and zpool/zfs commands on 9.1-RELEASE (possibly because of unavailable pool?) Message-ID: <51952CDF.8080705@web.de> In-Reply-To: <3A4D99D3DC69494880790E7971F218B4@multiplay.co.uk> References: <968416157.282645.1368232366317.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> <518EFE05.8010100@hub.org> <518F4130.6080201@hub.org> <518F4307.3060908@hub.org> <519285C9.8000306@web.de> <A6A43A3F71994DC68F4F51124FA213E5@multiplay.co.uk> <5192AD94.5020707@web.de> <op.ww4ag6z58527sy@ronaldradial.versatec.local> <5194AEDE.9040504@web.de> <3A4D99D3DC69494880790E7971F218B4@multiplay.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am 16.05.2013 19:43, schrieb Steven Hartland: > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henner Heck" <Henner.Heck@web.de> > >> Always happy to give someone a special moment. >> Thank you, now patch did something. >> It confirmed that it is the wrong file version for the patch, >> since the replacements failed and the only changes are additions. >> Output: >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Hmm... Looks like a unified diff to me... >> The text leading up to this was: >> -------------------------- >> |--- sys/boot/zfs/zfs.c.orig 2011-10-20 18:15:29.966685430 +0000 >> |+++ sys/boot/zfs/zfs.c 2011-10-20 18:18:22.291033636 +0000 >> -------------------------- >> Patching file sys/boot/zfs/zfs.c using Plan A... >> Hunk #1 succeeded at 47 (offset 2 lines). >> Hunk #2 failed at 423. >> 1 out of 2 hunks failed--saving rejects to sys/boot/zfs/zfs.c.rej >> Hmm... Ignoring the trailing garbage. >> done >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> I'm still hoping that someone can give the reason for the increased >> delays. >> Since nothing actually goes wrong but just takes ages, >> they might have been introduced on purpose, >> not considering the possibility of a deliberately unavailable pool.(?) > > As I mentioned in my previous response this patch is no longer needed in > 9.x. > > Regards > Steve > > ================================================ > This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. > and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of > misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, > printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in > it. > In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission > please telephone +44 845 868 1337 > or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk. > > I got that, and thanks again for trying to help. I just tried it out to show Roland that i learned to use patch properly and his hint was not in vain. ;) Unfortunately the initial issue remains unsolved. Regards, Henner Heck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51952CDF.8080705>