ÎÒÖÐÐÄͶ×ÊÊýÊ®ÍòÔª½¨ÉèµĄ̈ÖÝÃÅ»§ÍøÕ¾¡°ÍøÉĮ̈ÖÝ¡±£¨http://www.tz-net.com£©£¬ÊÇÁ˽ą̂ÖÝ¡¢Ðû´«Ì¨ÖݵÄÍøÉÏ´°¿Ú¡£
ÍøÕ¾¸Ä°æºó£¬Öн顢ÉÌÎñ¡¢·þÎñ¹¦ÄÜÍ»³ö£¬ÔÚµ±µØÓÐÁ¼ºÃµÄÊг¡ÐÎÏóºÍÐû´«Ó°ÏìÁ¦¡£
ÏÖÑ°Çó¸÷µØºÏ×÷»ï°é£¬·þÎñÏîÄ¿°üÀ¨£º¹ã¸æ¡¢ÍøÕ¾½¨Éè¡¢ÐÅÏ¢·¢²¼¡¢×Éѯ¡¢ÏîÄ¿Òý½øµÈ£¬¶ÔÖнé»ú¹¹Ìṩ¸ß±ÈÀý»Ø±¨¡£
ÓÐÒâºÏ×÷Çë
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 10:15:12PM -0700, Jon Arney wrote:
> Hello,
>
> At the risk of beating a dead horse and annoying you all
> terribly much, I would like to submit some of my thinking
> on a Hurd logging facility. Feel free to tear this to
> shreads, but I think the discussion should be sta
Aparently I stand corrected. Apologies and thanks for your
patience.
>
> What do you mean by "its present state." And if syslogd is lacking,
> would it not, perhaps, be better to try to extend it?
As I said, I am not opposed to using syslogd and think starting there
is a good idea. If you bel
Jon Arney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The possibility exists for users to flood the log port.
Just an idea...
What I think would be pretty cool: let the logging function use
/servers/log (or whatever) if the server is running as root and
~/servers/log (or whatever) otherwise.
This would be q
> Neal H Walfield wrote:
> >
> > Can you justify why this is better than syslog?
>
> It is not inherently better than syslogd. It does, however,
> serve a slightly different class of process. I am not opposed in
> principle to adapting syslog to handle Hurd/Mach ports as
> opposed to Unix dom
Neal H Walfield wrote:
>
> Can you justify why this is better than syslog?
It is not inherently better than syslogd. It does, however,
serve a slightly different class of process. I am not opposed in
principle to adapting syslog to handle Hurd/Mach ports as
opposed to Unix domain sockets or UD
Can you justify why this is better than syslog?
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
Hello,
At the risk of beating a dead horse and annoying you all
terribly much, I would like to submit some of my thinking
on a Hurd logging facility. Feel free to tear this to
shreads, but I think the discussion should be started
and work begun on a solution to the problem of what to
do about a h
I restarted to work on the problem I reported several
months ago [1]. It is very difficult for me to say what's
going wrong. I wrote a minimal program, which let the
oskit-mach kernel crash:
#include
#include
#include
int
main (int
Jon Arney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> When we use oskit-mach we can get better data with gdb over serial
>> line.
>
> If you will be switching uKernels, does this mean that the zalloc
> problem is not worth investigating since it will probably go away
> with gnumach, or am I missing something.
¼®»çÇÐÀ§
ÀÌ»óÀÇ ³í¹®À̳ª ÇØ´çºÐ¾ßÀÇ Àü¹®°¡¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ ÀÛ¼ºµÈ ÀÚ·áÆÄÀÏÀ» ºÐ¾ßº°·Î Á¤¸®ÇÏ¿´½À´Ï´Ù. ¹æ¼Û´ë ¹× ÀÏ¹Ý ´ëÇлýµéÀÇ ¸®Æ÷Æ®¸¦ À§ÇÑ ¿ø¹®
ÀÚ·áÆÄÀÏ(hwp) ¹× À̹ÌÁö ÆÄÀÏ(pdf)À» Á¦°øÇÏ°í ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù.
Àι®°úÇкÎ
±¹¾î±¹¹®Çаú | ¿µ¾î¿µ¹®Çаú | Áß¾îÁß¹®Çаú | ºÒ¾îºÒ¹®Çаú | ÀϺ»Çаú
11 matches
Mail list logo
