Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 05 Sep 2022 05:24:49 +0100
From:      Jamie Landeg-Jones <jamie@catflap.org>
To:        mason@blisses.org, jamie@catflap.org
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, eugen@grosbein.net
Subject:   Re: Help debugging Vultr boot delay...?
Message-ID:  <202209050424.2854Onkd054176@donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net>
In-Reply-To: <YwpvC8uFxxY35hDo@blisses.org>
References:  <YwWoo5t22D33YNTA@blisses.org> <202208271429.27RETkGg063822@donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net> <YwpvC8uFxxY35hDo@blisses.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mason Loring Bliss <mason@blisses.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 03:29:46PM +0100, Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote:
>
> > < smbios.chassis.version="pc-i440fx-5.2"
> > > smbios.chassis.version="pc-i440fx-7.0"
> > < smbios.system.version="pc-i440fx-5.2"
> > > smbios.system.version="pc-i440fx-7.0"
>
> This is interesting. I've included the new detail in my Vultr report.
>
> From the bug report:
>
>     > I see 5.2 matching Debian stable and 7.0 matching Debian testing/sid
>     > (or Bullseye backports) if it's Debian, with the only Ubuntu match
>     > being Kinetic Kudo, 22.10, and I'm guessing you're not running that
>     > since it's not released yet.
>
> So I'm going to spin up a hypervisor here using QEMU/KVM versions to match
> and I'll see if I can reproduce the odd results.

One thing I didn't try, and that's creating a FreeBSD instance with the
"q35" system version. (That should happen if you do a manual install from
an ISO.)

-- q35 was disabled for FreeBSD due to problems which I think have been fixed
in current/stable (but not made it to "release" yet. So trying a recent "current"
ISO may prove useful.

Cheers, jamie



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?202209050424.2854Onkd054176>