Subject: Re: Proc size mismatch
To: Andrew Crossley <>
From: Thilo Manske <Thilo.Manske@HEH.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>
List: netbsd-users
Date: 02/25/2000 15:59:29
On Fri, Feb 25, 2000 at 07:18:50PM -0800, Andrew Crossley wrote:
> Because we do not use DES in Aust., the build would fail when Makefiles had the
> bsd.crypto line in them.  Whether right or wrong, I commented out all of the
No, it would not fail. And yes, it's wrong :-)

If you don't have 
<path to your sources>/crypto-intl
<path to your sources>/crypto-us

no strong cryptography will be included.

The "weak" cryptography used for passwd etc. should be allowed in Australia,
this is what Unix uses since day one (or maybe two or three)... is just a wrapper to detect the presence of cryptography

> lines in Makefiles with this in.  The build seemed to work fine when i did
> this.  (you are all probabely choking on your dinner reading this!!).  So I
Well... :*}

> came to the point when I went to build ps using the new libraries.
> Unfortunately, I have lost the output files i made of the errors, so I am going
> from my memory.  I seem to remember that there was a problem relating to libkvm
> or something of the sort.  Suffice as to say that ps did not build at all, and

Seems that you are not going the "make build" way, so do you...

a) did a make includes before you build the libraries?
b) updated or removed the .depends (if present) before you compiled the
   sources? (or use target make dependall instead of just make)
c) installed the libraries before you build ps (and co.)?
d) .. (maybe some other stuff I don't remember right)

If you get in troubles, a "make cleandir" and starting all over is often

> i went from a semi-working ps to a completely non-working ps.  According to the
> FAQ, there are more binaries in /bin that have this same problem.  I made such
> a stuff-up, and needing more space for NetBSD anyway, I took the disgusting
> WinCrap attitude and re-installed my system.
> Can anyone advise of the steps necessary to build dynamic libraires that match
> a kernal, or should i just drown myself in the dunny ??
The simple way is to just do a "make build" (I prefer it with an
"UPDATE=y") whenever the kernel interface changes (the letter in the
kernel version string will change).

> As we all know, life is pretty hard without ps, especially for newbies that
> need to kill the odd process now and again.
Newbies should not use -current at all! :-)

That's like giving someone a race car or truck who hasn't finished
driving scool.

> I feel that people who migrate from Linux to NetBSD will probabely want to
> build a CURRENT kernal sooner rather than later, as it is this "version-junkie"
> attitude that us Linux users tend to have when it comes to kernals.
I doubt many of those "Linux-version-junkies" are using 2.3.* kernels, wich
is somwhat like -current.
Actually, -current is even more "experimental", since Linux 2.3.* kernels are
snapshots on a irregular basis and -current is an automated daily
snapshot of work in progress.

Since -current isn't even guaranteed to compile (and it often won't) avoid
current if you can and trace the RELEASE-tree, unless you've gained some
experiences in compiling software, it'll cause you much less troubles and
Or wait for the announcements of precompiled snapshots and use those.

Tracing -current is fun, but it's not the comfortable way of using NetBSD.
Dies ist Thilos Unix Signature! Viel Spass damit.