From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 24 17:52:21 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2FDB106566C; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 17:52:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org) From: Jung-uk Kim To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 13:52:12 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <4E04C5FA.90905@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4E04C5FA.90905@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201106241352.14262.jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Matt , George Kontostanos Subject: Re: virtualbox-ose 4.0.8 fails 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: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 17:52:21 -0000 On Friday 24 June 2011 01:14 pm, Matt wrote: > It fails a couple ways actually, first on an isDVD in a disk system > request...commenting out the inq_(something, not in front of > machine with recent svn) parts of that code yields virtualbox > compiling, but failing during kmod compile due to the recent change > (without revision bump) from cpumask_t to cpuset_t. > > It seems like recent CAM changes and CPU change are going to > require some changes to virtualbox in HostHardwareFreeBSD.c and > mp-r0drv.c at least. Even though OS revision was not bumped, > perhaps Makefile can switch on presence of cpuset userland utility? > > Luckily I only csup'd a machine I don't really need Vbox on, so I'm > holding back all other machines until Vbox maintainers sort out the > issue. You should be able to build the kmod with this patch. http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/patch-src-VBox-Runtime-r0drv-freebsd-mp-r0drv-freebsd.c Just drop this patch in ports/emulators/virtualbox-ose-kmod/files and rebuild. Please note the revision wasn't set right for the obvious reason, though. Do we really need revision bump, BTW? "Current" means "no seat belt" anyway. ;-) Cheers, Jung-uk Kim