From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jul 19 15:51:00 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96C077BE
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 15:51:00 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com)
Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56E6217F
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2013 15:51:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by wonkity.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id r6JFouFd022499;
 Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:50:56 -0600 (MDT)
 (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com)
Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost)
 by wonkity.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) with ESMTP id r6JFousA022496;
 Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:50:56 -0600 (MDT)
 (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:50:56 -0600 (MDT)
From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com>
To: David Noel <david.i.noel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bulk] FreeBSD upgrade woes (8.3 -> 8.4)
In-Reply-To: <CAHAXwYAL1_up6fm1-rH2e34CYQ4_j29Dk+-qA=T9+3xkzZ-Uug@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1307190939130.22377@wonkity.com>
References: <CAHAXwYCaYGoF9N0GRFRiG_hqVxdM23NjMSfPsw+GPnfEmgtP9Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+8gk9_FgThSWuSrg0b5O0Hnqd0HtvTRKfgnVZ3wuXeenhfucw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHAXwYCym-5c7Mao2Gx5iPSm_oN-EmwLiBJnEGESodxsRwc16Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20130711120039.a99aeea20ecd078b9d29f18a@yahoo.es>
 <CAHAXwYAL1_up6fm1-rH2e34CYQ4_j29Dk+-qA=T9+3xkzZ-Uug@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3
 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:50:57 -0600 (MDT)
Cc: feld@feld.me, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org,
 Eduardo Morras <emorrasg@yahoo.es>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 15:51:00 -0000

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013, David Noel wrote:

>> Perhaps make buildkernel was compiled with -j >1, it's known to create a
>> buggy kernel. Check your make configuration. Adding a -B, like make -B -j N
>> buildkernel may work and is fast if -j is set to number or processors, but
>> it's safer do a make -j 1 buildkernel, same for buildworld.
>
> I replaced the kernel with the one on the 8.4 memstick and it booted
> just fine. I then built and installed a kernel without using the j
> flag to test Eduardo's theory. It booted without problem. Maybe
> there's something to this -j >1 causing buggy kernels rumor.

It's possible.  But again, I've been using -j >1 for years on a variety 
of processors, mostly Intel, without problems.  That's with buildworld 
and kernel (which is buildkernel plus installkernel), but not with 
installworld.

Are you using clang instead of gcc?  That could be very different.