Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 14:00:24 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Sascha Schumann <sascha@schumann.cx> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: Conclusion of thread "Deadlocks with recent SMP current"? Message-ID: <20041002210024.GA55807@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0410022223070.1355@localhost> References: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0410022154210.1355@localhost> <20041002200901.GA53162@xor.obsecurity.org> <Pine.LNX.4.60.0410022223070.1355@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--dDRMvlgZJXvWKvBx Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 10:49:52PM +0200, Sascha Schumann wrote: > >Yes, this is believed to have been resolved in 5.3. >=20 > Good to hear. >=20 > >So, you're running 5.2 on those systems, which was documented as a > >development release and not recommended for use on production systems >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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. Er, well, that doesn't mean anything other than no-one updated the errata page. Kris --dDRMvlgZJXvWKvBx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBXxboWry0BWjoQKURAgFFAKDnR1nYmn6SND1vtoJUNOEcyQrA3ACgmIK7 ecPC6l84FzKRcWmG5DCNdpM= =icDM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --dDRMvlgZJXvWKvBx--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041002210024.GA55807>