Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      18 Dec 1995 03:58:54 +0800
From:      peter@haywire.dialix.com (Peter Wemm)
To:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD-current-stable ???
Message-ID:  <4b1spu$mou$1@haywire.DIALix.COM>
References:  <199512171436.OAA13800@server.netcraft.co.uk>, <199512171731.JAA09419@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
dyson@freefall.freebsd.org (John Dyson) writes:
>> Absolutely, the vm headers are a good example. Peter was fixing
>> code for a while after this commit because some parts of the tree
>> WOULDN'T EVEN COMPILE!  Was a make world done before this commit,
>> I somehow doubt it given the glaring problems that Peter fixed.
>> Missing the odd bug when changing the filesystem to allow 1Tb files
>> is one thing and is what -current is for, not doing even a basic
>> sanity check to make sure the tree still compiles is a totally
>> different case and one we used to be a lot more stern about when
>> it happened.
>> 
>> I think the core team has become a little too soft when dealing
>> with it's cotributors :-)
>> 
>A make world was not done, and if someone would donate a reasonable
>machine to me to let me do so -- it would be very nice.  I probably
>have the least powerful machine of any major contributor (and have
>only one.)  Those with expensive high power machines are welcome to
>help.  (Machines bigger than a 3 yr old 20MB 486/66 :-)).

I'm using Julian Elischer's 16MB 386SX-25 box with my own 486/66
motherboard plus some memory in it..  I know the feeling!  (hence the
reason why I committed the "make -DNOCLEAN world" speedup.. :-)

Most of the significant changes that I've been making have been
running for a while, some on my employer's SVR4 machines in different
forms.. ;-)  I try and resist the temptation to make "harmless quick
fixes" on the spur of the moment, but I've been a bit less careful
lately and have done a few bad ones..  

>The kernel did work -- and there was some chaff (a bug in sys_process.c)
>-- oh, by the way did the 1Tb changes break things -- or was it the header file
>changes/improvements????  All I had to do to get ps working again was to
>rebuild libkvm/ps....

The 1Tb kernel stuff has fine as far as I could tell...  It's been
working flawlessly for me since it went in.  The include file cleanup
was what caused the most pain that I could see.  Unfortunately, the
extreme nesting of include files was directly linked to an unnecessary
compile slowdown.. It _had_ to be cleaned up.  The only problem is
that because of the excessive nesting and redundant or inefficient
choices that's accumulated over time, many of the user-mode programs
have become dependent on this junk.

Sure, it was painful while it was up in the air, and a good deal of it was
not obvious how to fix for the non-guru types who have been plodding
along in -current, but I think it is/was worth it...

Currently, as far as I can tell, the main horror stories being
reported at the moment appear to be coming from AHC driver users
(2740/2840/2940)..

Oh! BTW:  My system was reliably panicing if I did a 'dd' from a raw
partition with a 1MB block size, in vm_bounce_page_free().  This has
inexplicably stopped some time over the last week or so!!
(Buslogic BT445S VLB card with inability to DMA above 16MB, so bounce
buffers are used).

-Peter

>John
>dyson@freebsd.org




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4b1spu$mou$1>