07:01:50 Would like to have few eyes on https://code.illumos.org/c/illumos-gate/+/2374 please:) 07:01:51 → CODE REVIEW 2374: 14993 zfs-tests: Move platform independent tests to a shared runfile (NEW) | https://www.illumos.org/issues/14993 08:06:02 jclulow or richlowe could you move https://www.illumos.org/issues/2271 to illumos-gate? 08:06:04 → BUG 2271: CIFS clients fail to authenticate when idmap is using IDMU (New) 14:47:03 [illumos-gate] 15001 Unable to set smb property max_protocol to 3.1.1 or empty -- Gordon Ross 15:04:20 [illumos-gate] 14999 SMB server mis-handles very long file names -- Gordon Ross 15:10:23 [illumos-gate] 15007 zfs-tests: bootfs_006_pos is failing -- Toomas Soome 18:54:49 tsoome: I have moved it and assigned it to you 19:18:02 Ah thanks, Matt Barden was asking for it but now he can handle it. 19:19:46 I'll assign it to Matt? 19:30:29 I guess so... 20:05:53 jbk: can't you just publish multiple TXT records? I though that's how it worked, but never really dig into mdns a whole lot, u just fire off multiple dns-sd commands and it works well enough 20:08:52 but will clients interpret that correctly? 20:09:07 or will the new one (for a host) replace the previous one? 20:10:25 i'm hardly an mDNS expert (I'm hoping maybe someone lurking is) 20:15:40 the rfc is not super clear at first glance 20:15:42 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6762#section-17 20:16:09 basically avoid large things I guess 20:17:13 lets see if 6763 has more info 20:17:26 that the service discovery specific one 20:17:31 skimming over it now 20:19:44 that looks like a new, just one record 20:20:07 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6763#section-6.2 and a rather smallish recommend size at that, it also seems highly MTU dependent 20:21:30 danm it 20:21:57 6.8 does say you can have multiple in some cases 20:56:23 [illumos-gate] 14963 bhyve destroy should be more robust -- Patrick Mooney 21:37:55 i tried to build illumos-gate on older system that does not have O_DIRECTORY, and it failed in find_elf; the fix is easy, but i'm not sure if i should file an issue as it's the native tool or should just leave it as is as O_DIRECTORY support was integrated more than 2 years ago 21:41:06 sorry.. that's my fault.. 21:41:49 I was I guess trying to be overly cautious and didn't realize O_DIRECTORY was that new 21:41:54 (for us) 21:42:21 i can't call it new, it's from jan 2020 :) 21:42:45 i don't know if we really have a target for the 'oldest' we expect to be able to build from 21:43:23 but i'd be happy to review a change to make it work with older systems (or I can throw one up if you'd like since it was my fault) 21:44:03 i have it ready, just not sure if it's worth "fixing" 21:44:09 i mean we can just define it to '0' if it doesn't exist, or add an fstat(2) call to verify 21:45:21 well i guess if it's not a _huge_ effort just to keep things easier for people.. 21:50:00 ok, https://www.illumos.org/issues/15016 21:50:01 → BUG 15016: find_elf should cope with O_DIRECTORY absence (New)