On Wed, Apr 26, 2000 at 09:54:26PM -0700, Jim Franklin wrote:
> Here's the revised version of os-faq. Jeff, congrats on the new
> site. It's going to be of great help to everyone involved with the
> hurd. I included a link to hurddocs.sourceforge.net . Will this link be
> viable for the futu
Hi folks,
Here's the revised version of os-faq. Jeff, congrats on the new
site. It's going to be of great help to everyone involved with the
hurd. I included a link to hurddocs.sourceforge.net . Will this link be
viable for the future? I reckon it doesn't have to sound pretty(the
link) but i
I am pleased to announce to the *-hurd lists that I have been given space
on sourceforge for running a documentation project for the Hurd. This
project is a reformulation of my previous site "hurd.zugzug.com".
The formal release date for this site is May 1st. Please do not expect
anything on
On Wed, Apr 26, 2000 at 11:26:37PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> Anyway, here is a patch.
Well, I'm not (yet) a hurd hacker[1], but this patch strikes me as
fundamentally wrong (even if it fixes the problem for now).
The real problem is that io_seek uses a macro which is to be used only
when
On Wed, Apr 26, 2000 at 11:09:39PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> Note that the first file, io_seek.c, defines diskfs_readonly as a macro to 0.
Ah, I think I see clearly now. I should think first, and then post.
Anyway, here is a patch.
Marcus
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http
Hi Thomas (or someone else who wants to answer),
in light of the io-seek.c failures on readonly stores, I have the following
questions:
1. When are you supposed to call diskfs_check_readonly, and when are you
supposed to check the value of diskfs_readonly directly?
2. What is the purpose of the
