From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 15 03:37:51 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F47416A41C for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 03:37:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from emaste@phaedrus.sandvine.ca) Received: from mailserver.sandvine.com (sandvine.com [199.243.201.138]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C20DC43D53 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 03:37:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from emaste@phaedrus.sandvine.ca) Received: from labgw2.phaedrus.sandvine.com ([192.168.3.11]) by mailserver.sandvine.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:37:48 -0400 Received: by labgw2.phaedrus.sandvine.com (Postfix, from userid 12627) id 7871913640; Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:37:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:37:48 -0400 From: Ed Maste To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Maxim Konovalov Message-ID: <20050615033748.GA84053@sandvine.com> References: <20050613192308.GA87640@sandvine.com> <20050614082039.GA2038@dragon.NUXI.org> <20050614224704.Y75797@mp2.macomnet.net> <20050614190854.GA12928@dragon.NUXI.org> <20050614235132.L76669@mp2.macomnet.net> <20050615023600.GA20721@dragon.NUXI.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050615023600.GA20721@dragon.NUXI.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jun 2005 03:37:48.0643 (UTC) FILETIME=[99CFEB30:01C5715B] Cc: Subject: Re: savecore(8) increments /var/crash/bounds on each boot 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: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 03:37:51 -0000 On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 07:36:00PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > Do you understand the fix? How does lying in printheader() fix anything? > Moving the call to getbounds() back to the original location is the "fix" > but then it negates -vv. We shouldn't lie in printheader(). The problem is of course that getbounds() not only gets the count from the bounds file but also increments it. The decision to write a core hasn't been made at the time printheader is called for -vv. Thus the reported bounds might not correspond to a core. The newly added dump status is also meaningless in the -vv case, since the status may still be determined after the -vv printheader. How about just not showing the bounds for the -vv case? -- Ed Maste, Sandvine Incorporated