15:46:04 and now the 2023a TZ data is already obsoleted by 2023b, thanks to Lebanon adjusting it's DST switchover until after Ramadan 15:46:46 It keeps is on our toes! I have illumos 15510 (fenix) out for review - just running final tests before submitting the change later today. 15:46:47 FEATURE 15510: Update tzdata to 2023b (In Progress) 15:46:47 ↳ https://www.illumos.org/issues/15510 | https://code.illumos.org/c/illumos-gate/+/2739 16:05:37 yeah, I saw that a few minutes later as I catch up on mail first thing this morning 16:06:32 get yourself a coffee. 18:45:04 in the thread under https://fosstodon.org/@cks⊙ms/110075273226149559 I mentioned that we're adding fsync() calls to useradd/groupadd/etc. but from another comment in that thread it sounds like maybe you just want to make them call the illumos librename 18:51:31 @alanc since you're here, dumb question. What man section is the Solaris `dd` command in? 18:51:51 dd(8) 18:55:51 Ahh, thank you. 18:56:12 One could make the case for that belonging in dd(1), but I figured it was inherited from SysV. 18:56:22 librename is great - I think rmustacc wanted to only have to work out the order of the hoops once! 18:56:23 You've essentially confirmed it, thanks! 18:56:35 interesting. FBSD has it in (1). 18:57:00 (Which is where I'd have also expected to see it.) 18:58:51 MacOS has it in (1), which was what prompted me to ask. At least one Linux has it in dd(1) as well. 18:59:24 CentOS Stream 8 has it in 1, so I presume all RHEL-derived ones do (but can't check). 19:16:33 danmcd: I (and I assume solaris), just rearrange sections, rather than judging if the sections things were in also were sensible. 19:17:09 Oh no arguments from me about THAT! dd moving out of 8 is it's own question, is all. 19:17:17 and I don't think _anyone_ bothered to fully line up the GNU manual pages 19:17:23 Heh heh heh. 19:17:28 so I think on (historical) solaris, and modern illumos OI, gdd(1) but dd(8) 19:18:25 Given ours/Solaris's lives in /usr/bin, one could make a move-out-of-8 argument as well, but again, that was not the point of the great manpage renumbering. 19:18:43 Not a hill I wanna die on, just one I wanna point out. 19:19:22 So rmustacc's improved i40e bits link-type bits are building.... I can run some errands in that 65min build window. 20:05:11 speaking of i40e.. i (finally) have some changes that will hopefully prevent the glacial dladm create-vnic issues you can hit with it w/ jumbo frames 20:08:20 if the internal smoke testing bears out, I'm going to see if I can get it up for external review since it'd be good to have since there's more i40e expertise in the wider community 20:36:41 jbk: infernal smoke testing would be more thorough 20:36:43 and perhaps appropriate 20:48:34 Oohhh jbk --> if you bring up a testing army, I'd LOVE for them to take shots at fenix illumos 13230 too 20:48:35 BUG 13230: i40e has duplicate traffic when used with bhyve/snoop running (New) 20:48:35 ↳ https://www.illumos.org/issues/13230 21:12:29 danmcd: yeah, probably a SVR4ism, since SunOS 4.1.4 & earlier had man1/dd.1 and then Solaris 2.0 & later had it in section 1m 21:14:26 I don't see man pages in the SVR4 archives I have, but it appears to be in section 1M in the SVR3 archives 21:18:19 I'm pretty sure 1M etc came from SysV at some point in general 21:18:28 but I also seem to remember there was a lot of weirdness in the interim 21:18:35 before everyone agreed to just go back to what they did originally. 21:22:17 (except IBM I guess, they seem to still have non-numeric sections) 21:34:07 yeah, the 1M vs. 8 came from SysV - I was looking more at dd in 1 vs 1m/8 21:36:58 ah, yeah. 21:37:22 I'd be willing to describe it as "a mess" currently 21:37:25 dtrace(8) anyone? 21:40:31 svcs(1) & svcprop(1) vs. svccfg(8) and svcadm(8) [yes I know why, but still look in the wrong dir too often] 22:09:55 hmm... 22:10:57 it appears nvme_ioc_cmd() does not deal well with a timeout value of 0 22:16:45 (might be an issue for anyone that issues a pass-thru nvme ioctl)