On 2018-Feb-18, at 1:46 PM, Mark Millard <marklmi26-fbsd_at_yahoo.com> wrote: > On 2018-Feb-18, at 1:33 PM, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik_at_gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 9:38 PM, Trond Endrestøl < >> Trond.Endrestol_at_fagskolen.gjovik.no> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 11:51-0800, Mark Millard wrote: >>> >>>> Note: -r329448 was reverted in -r329461 : racy. >>> >>> True. I got a crash when compiling r329451 while running r329449. >>> I've now booted the r329422 ZFS BE and I'm attempting to build >>> r329529. >>> >> >> Looking around strongly suggests r329448 is the culprit. If you can verify >> 329447 works fine we are mostly done here. >> >> Note the revision got reverted and different variant got in in r329531. >> >> That said, if r329447 works then the issue should be already fixed and in >> particular fresh head should work fine. > > My initial problem was with -r329465, which is after -r329461 reverted > -r329488 . Trond reported in one note that he had problems with > -r329464 , also after -r329488 was reverted. Trond has also reported > -r329449 failed. Dumb typos above: I meant -r329448 instead of -r329488 both times. > I did manage to revert to -r329447 earlier and so far the results > suggests that it works. > > From this I get that -r329449 is the the one that is common to > all the so--far failing combinations. -r329448 is not common to > all of them. === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com ( markmi at dsl-only.net is going away in 2018-Feb, late)Received on Sun Feb 18 2018 - 20:50:19 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:15 UTC