Conclusion of thread "Deadlocks with recent SMP current"?
sascha at schumann.cx
Sat Oct 2 13:49:58 PDT 2004
> Yes, this is believed to have been resolved in 5.3.
Good to hear.
> So, you're running 5.2 on those systems, which was documented as a
> development release and not recommended for use on production systems
No, *I* am not running FreeBSD 5 anywhere on productive
systems. Unfortunaly, the ISP recommended it to this
particular owner of two systems where I am doing some
voluntary work in my spare time.
One of the servers ran 5.1 with an uptime of >200 days.
There were no indications that 5.2 contained such vast
regressions in comparison to 5.1. Even today, the 5.2.1
errata page does not say anything about SMP issues.
> (and indeed contained numerous rough edges and bugs), and you're
> scared to update to 5.3 which is going to be designated as the
> beginning of the 5.3-STABLE branch (and has had a couple of months of
> extensive bugfixing and QA)?
I would rather downgrade to 5.1 (because I know it works
reliably on this piece of equipment), but unfortunately,
somewhere during "make installworld", the install binary
starts to segfault.
truss shows that the 5.1 /usr/bin/install calls the new
fstatfs syscall 397. AFAICT this could only happen when the
5.1 install binary is linked against the 5.2 libc. I suppose
installworld does not point LD_LIBRARY_PATH at the newly
build libraries under /usr/obj? If not, what is the best way
to ensure that binaries are linked against suitable libs
More information about the freebsd-current