From owner-freebsd-current Mon Oct 20 07:38:14 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id HAA26152 for current-outgoing; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 07:38:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current) Received: from word.smith.net.au (ppp20.portal.net.au [202.12.71.120]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26138 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 07:38:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@word.smith.net.au) Received: from word.smith.net.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by word.smith.net.au (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA01025; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 00:03:13 +0930 (CST) Message-Id: <199710201433.AAA01025@word.smith.net.au> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: Christoph Kukulies cc: Greg Lehey , freebsd-current@freefall.FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bad system call - world build In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 20 Oct 1997 14:52:43 +0200." <19971020145243.29303@gil.physik.rwth-aachen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 00:03:06 +0930 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > > ===> share/termcap > > > ex - /a/src/share/termcap/termcap.src < /a/src/share/termcap/reorder > /dev/null > > > Bad system call - core dumped ... > > This is almost a FAQ. Build a new kernel first, boot with it, then > > you should be able to continue. > > Not quite, Greg. Normally I know what to do when proc.h has been changed > (ps/w etc. weirdnesses) but in this case I'm not sure whether > building a new kernel (3.0-current) and booting it on top of a > set of (up to then) 2.2.2-binaries would be a could remedy here. Funnily enough, Greg is quite right. I almost feel that I'm insulting him by backing him up, but Chris, this *is* a FAQ, and if you were reading the -current list like you're supposed to, you would know all about this. You do need a newer kernel to get past this. The issue *was*announced* when the change was made. There was some attempt made to put in place code to deal with the new system call, but it appears to have been unsuccessful and at any rate is only needed for the bootstrapping case. Going from 2.x to 3.x is going to get harder, not easier. > I will more likely follow the advice of your forespeaker, namely > excluding the termcap subdir from the worldbuild. This is stupid, and fails to address the problem. mike