Yes, it's just a comment, not a complaint. If I try to pick UFS, it restarts the install, in a loop. But ZFS is fine too. Just did the kyua test and pretty much same as last week's: Results file id is usr_tests.20200117-002752-646645 Results saved to /home/clay/.kyua/store/results.usr_tests.20200117-002752-646645.db 7652/7761 passed (109 failed) clay_at_bsd13:~ % kyua test -k /usr/tests/Kyuafile On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:29 AM Yuri Pankov <yp_at_xvoid.org> wrote: > David Wolfskill wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:18:41AM +0000, Clay Daniels wrote: > >> 13.0-CURRENT r356767 would not take NO for an answer, and kept up a loop > >> until I gave up trying to use UFS. No big deal, seems to work fine... > >> > >> Clay > >> .... > > > > Err...? Is there some additional context that I'm missing? > > > > I've been tracking head daily for ... longer than I really want to > > think about, including on at least one system that has no ZFS file > > systems; the last couple of smoke-tests were at: > > > > FreeBSD g1-53.catwhisker.org 13.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 13.0-CURRENT #7 > r356758M/356758: Wed Jan 15 03:49:49 PST 2020 root_at_g1-53.catwhisker.org:/common/S4/obj/usr/src/amd64.amd64/sys/CANARY > amd64 1300076 1300076 > > > > and > > > > FreeBSD g1-53.catwhisker.org 13.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 13.0-CURRENT #8 > r356786M/356787: Thu Jan 16 03:56:45 PST 2020 root_at_g1-53.catwhisker.org:/common/S4/obj/usr/src/amd64.amd64/sys/CANARY > amd64 1300076 1300076 > > > > It is not clear to me at what point anything might have a chance > > to indicate that it "wanted ZFS" and request an action. > > Likely it's about the latest 13.0-CURRENT snapshot image (r356767) and > the change to bsdinstall to make ZFS default partitioning scheme, now > discussed on arch_at_. >Received on Fri Jan 17 2020 - 00:19:07 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:22 UTC