From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 1 01:36:08 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from hub.FreeBSD.org (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:88]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D55A2D4; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 01:36:07 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 21:36:04 -0400 From: Glen Barber To: Dave Hayes Subject: Re: FreeBSD 9.3-RC2 and vmware 5.1 esxi (not a duplicate) Message-ID: <20140701013604.GU1216@hub.FreeBSD.org> References: <53B21009.5000901@jetcafe.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vBRosIkLXbYTRpGW" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53B21009.5000901@jetcafe.org> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT amd64 X-SCUD-Definition: Sudden Completely Unexpected Dataloss X-SULE-Definition: Sudden Unexpected Learning Event User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 01:36:08 -0000 --vBRosIkLXbYTRpGW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 06:34:01PM -0700, Dave Hayes wrote: > This may look like a duplicate of >=20 > <53B1DB21.7020900@jetcafe.org> >=20 > but it isn't. It's the same issue, but now it also belongs to the stock I= SO. > We tested the stock FreeBSD 9.3-RC2 iso on vmware 5.1 esxi as a guest. It > says clearly >=20 > CD Loader 1.2 >=20 > and then there's screen gibberish which seems to indicate something is not > found. >=20 Can you provide a screenshot? > This evidence seems to indicate that there was a bootloader change between > r255456 and r267340 that may be causing this; I am not familiar with the > boot code enough to claim this is correct or not. >=20 > Does anyone have any insight into this issue? Should this issue be forwar= ded > to a different mailing list? Thanks in advance. :) Glen --vBRosIkLXbYTRpGW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJTshCEAAoJELls3eqvi17QE7AP/i5tdXvj86HCI8CJN/RqmKrg AvK8j82BXSgY1ZqN5/JOeQA1BS13/ui5+OsHG9U0nKqosvLVtz4ojfjuFXmG3rl9 dv6uw5wlXQSw8pN7kn/eHDS7brTYoAZQsDNzCPiChTm+g2LvEAuYmd1V8RCSwi/o moYlCpYEdN+IvXuSmMJIza93ZuHwILviFNeMjl7R5hQX1UynKeq3tTUwu6QLHSBY gBIWQsoxyW7VXyUKbxQx9tK8Lo0ZNuyBiBQufA+aMMR4WlY+Sck2Ibf3kEZ8lSks rZCf27SwbE4L9xNHEIQjFaLj0LQmRHKGEwTvqD9yeFr2C5+rvGoVNPM4g4X4kQn1 oaXFR866CEiv48S1rJbon/J4T/lVzgmL6pMn+b5kviHYc/VhfLWL+5Ls1S7m2Mm2 TvH1NyQJE2MKYPfJwhSS1AEksCiQ/5hXP6FqQwhbNPsgvKYWLBLve3efOgHA4s0X nXGlnRChXSWYMJAamj1WG3PyEQnnv2SGmlzm5mi+943O0sJgVLkj7ycodiRc7nZ/ BUhZLlNMbus+1cKH6/etLinzXeYIC/ILxb6e2KjCfZ01uVR6+SzDB9EVG3aZ4M3z GlOh2BRcp1wO7PblvkCJZiub5fiFrYTVv+dY6EDgaygBG2MRBBynUULq+lgwBdOv C1yOJPqggi6i8z/Ds/JX =mcKR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vBRosIkLXbYTRpGW--