OpenBSD Journal

Time to test snapshot packages!

Contributed by grey on from the your comrades need you dept.

Sam writes:
Once again, it's time to test the snapshots of the both base and packages to make sure they work for 3.6-release. Full tree lock on ports is only days away, so if you want working packages to ship with 3.6 - TEST THEM NOW

(Comments are closed)

  1. By Anonymous Coward ( on

    Does this mean 3.6 will ship before the expected Nov. 1 date?

    1. By Otto ( on http:/./

      Does this mean 3.6 will ship before the expected Nov. 1 date??

      What makes you think that?

      It is hard to make predictions, especially about the future. I'd say, test stuff, to help make 3.6 a high quality release. THat is much more important than speculating on the ship date.

    2. By Fábio Olivé Leite ( on

      Creating a product to ship takes time, so in order to be able to ship near Nov 1st, you obviously need to freeze things a while later, make release, test and test again, make the CD images, send them to manufacture, etc. Oh, and there's the song, artwork, und so weiter. It's not like Theo can apply a label to CVS on Nov 1st and boxes of CD sets will magically come out of thin air everywhere. Perhaps this should be included in the FAQ.

  2. By Chiron ( on

    Is it just me, or has anyone noticed that the newest snapshots' kernel doesn't detect more than one processor? I tried it on a quad Xeon Compaq server, and only one processor detects. But when I install the previous snapshot, it detects and works great on all four processors.

    1. By Otto Moerbeek ( on

      Please send a bug report including dmesg to bugs@, to makes sure that the post is getting read by the right people.

  3. By sickness ( on

    I know I should post more reports dmesg and so on, I tried a simple "strings" of the .core but the cgi didn't let me go on... ...anyway: I found out that the fluxbox (snapshot 11th august) package version 0.9.9 for sparc64 always coredumps. Is it just me or someone other did find this? I have a standard Ultra5 which I used to run openbsd 3.5 on it and it works ok... tnx

  4. By Anonymous Coward ( on

    btw, where should we report i386 smp problems on current ? is sendbug(1) still adequate ? or should we mail dmesg to someone in particular ? ( from 08/16 hangs up when booting my dual xeon machine, does it worth a report ?)

    1. By Otto ( on

      Yes, it is worth the trouble to post a report. Some rough guidelines for posting:

      If you feel the bug needs some discussion (i.e. you are not sure if it is a real bug), post to misc@.

      If you have a patch that is supposed to solve the problem and want to disccus it, or if you have an analysis what's going on, post to tech@.

      If you are pretty sure it is a bug, use sendbug(1).

      In any case, include as much relevant info as possible (like snapshot date and dmesg). We are now in release mode, and we need feedback to make sure 3.6 becomes a good release.

  5. By Chiron ( on

    I figured out right before I was going to send my dmesg and problem report that the problem I was having was with what Compaq passes as the Bios/firmware. In the SmartStart setup you have to specify Linux as the OS instead of "Other" or it won't see the other processors. I'll still email in my dmesg when I get a chance, though to help out.


Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]