From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1d5d51400906220920n58d465c2kf5794d878416b583@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 10:12:32 +0800 Message-ID: <1d5d51400906261912t34abc96eg62b07e4fd9a6372a@mail.gmail.com> From: Fernan Bolando To: 9fans@9fans.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] p9p vac issue Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0fab08c8-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:50 AM, erik quanstrom wro= te: >> looks like it's related to the error above. you might want to downgrade = to >> http://swtch.com/plan9port/plan9port-20090609.tgz > > fortune tells me > > The most effective debugging tool is still careful thought, > coupled with judiciously placed print statements. > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0-Kernighan, 1978 > > i don't think this bug is going to be fixed without a > bit of actual debugging. =A0since your theories are rather > easy to test, i would think it would be much easier to > arrive at a solution via a frontal assault bwk style, rather > than sniping at it from the safety of the mailing list. > > i promise, vac won't shoot back. =A0even if you pull out > gdb. > > i'm interested in what the actual bug is. yes, It appears I might be wrong This warning is probably just a overly paranoid openbsd compiler vac.c:509: warning: sizeof(pointer) possibly incorrect in argument 3 and might not be related to this error create bsize 8192 psize 8160vac: vacfscreate: vacfileroot: read too small: asked for 0 need at least 389 I looked at it again and tried the vac command on a test venti and it worked with no errors. Even with the sizeof warning. I no longer have a copy of the problematic plan9port.tgz so I took a new copy from swtch.com. It was either fixed by someone else or the error was a fluke. fernan --=20 http://www.fernski.com