From: Kern S. <ke...@si...> - 2009-10-10 23:52:58
|
On Saturday 10 October 2009 21:02:32 Jo Rhett wrote: > On Oct 10, 2009, at 11:25 AM, Kern Sibbald wrote: > > I am not sure what you mean by a "blowoff". I am definitely telling > > you that > > unless it is a bug, we don't deal with it on this list. > > It involves a hung process. No debug output. Exact same > configuration works on previous OS. Then it is most likely an OS bug. > Exact same problem on a > completely different system running the same code. > > Smells like a bug. Sounds like a bug. Looks like a bug. It's > probably a bug. > (it may be a bug that only affect FreeBSD, but it's a bug) There is definitely something wrong, but for the moment, to me it looks like a FreeBSD bug or a problem configuring your network. > > I did repost this to -users. If you respond there and assist then > I'll stop feeling like you're blowing it off. I put in 10-14 hours of work on Bacula for free every day, and unfortunately no longer have time to give support or read the Bacula users list, so I guess you will just need to continue to think I am "blowing it off" even if I don't know what it means, and I have done my best to respond to you. > > > Sorry, I have no idea what umtx_op does. > > I suggest you ask about this on the FreeBSD support list. > > Right. Because they know the bacula source code. Kern, everything > else compiles and runs just fine on this system, only bacula hangs. You apparently haven't bothered to check your facts -- just surf Internet a bit looking for _umtx_op. > Gee, where do you think the problem is? I have told you at least two times, I think it is either a network configuration problem or an OS bug. > Where do you think they will refer me to? Instead of just ignoring my advice, why don't you ask them? You might be surprised to see how many problems there are (or were) with _umtx on FreeBSD. > > I guess it's been a long time since I was active here, but I'm shocked > that the support quality has descended so far. From what I understand, you never asked on the bacula-users list, if that is the case, you are complaining about quality of support, but you never asked in the right place where some FreeBSD users might have already seen and resolved the problem. > You can't be bothered to identify what is happening at this point in the code, and what I might look at for the problem? Really? I am not sure what more I can do since I have already told you my best guess what the problem is, given the information at hand. I also told you that a gdb traceback could possibly be useful. > > Yes, I'll go read the source and figure it out from scratch myself if > I have to. Great. That is what Open Source is supposed to be about -- users helping resolve problems. > But if that's true, then I'll consider bacula > "unsupported" going forward. |