Title: ¹æ¹üâ°ú ¹æÃæ¸ÁÀÌ Çϳª·Î~~
O º» ¸ÞÀÏÀº Á¤º¸Åë½Å¸Á ÀÌ¿ëÃËÁø ¹× Á¤º¸º¸È£ µî¿¡ °üÇÑ ¹ý·ü Á¦ 50Á¶¿¡ ÀÇ°ÅÇÑ [±¤°í] ¸ÞÀÏÀÔ´Ï´ÙO e-mailÁÖ¼Ò´Â ÀÎÅͳݻ󿡼 ÃëµæÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ÁÖ¼Ò¿Ü ¾î¶°ÇÑ °³ÀÎ Á¤º¸µµ °¡Áö°í ÀÖÁö ¾Ê½À´Ï´Ù
¿À´Ã Áñ°Å¿î ÇÏ·ç°¡ µÇ¼¼¿ä. À¯ÀÍ
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 09:05:36PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Eek! You're sure that's Posix and not XOPEN or some other thing?
I'm so sorry, Thomas. But it just makes sense. I think I have read about
this behaviour in Stevens, and if it's so wired down in programmers heads
to go the
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Uh, I have now rebooted and the standard (the draft7 from the Austin
> group) in front of me. Let's look at the details:
>
> About open():
> "The open( ) function shall return a file descriptor for the named file that
> is the lowest file descriptor
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 04:51:35PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I don't have my copy of POSIX around, but I also remember a vague
> > requirement (or expectation) that the file descriptor allocated
> > is always the smallest file descript
On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 02:25:07AM +0200, Moritz Schulte wrote:
> I investigated the problem, which caused ftpfs to fail with some ftp
> servers (e.g. ftp.debian.org). The problem is that libftpconn
> sometimes tries to 'list' _directories_ and not _entries in a
> directory_.
Hi,
thanks again f
Title: Masters of Networking
ATTENTION ENTREPRENUERS:
Whether you spend a few hours per day or a few hours per month, this home based business
package can show you how to make as much money as you want, right from your own living room! This program i
Title: ´ëÇѹα¹ ´ëÇ¥Åýà ÄÉÀÌ¾Ë ÅýÃ
º» ¸ÞÀÏÀº Á¤º¸Åë½ÅºÎ ±Ç°í»çÇ׿¡ ÀÇ°Å Á¦¸ñ¿¡ [±¤°í]¶ó°í Ç¥½ÃµÈ ±¤°í¸ÞÀÏÀÔ´Ï´Ù.
¼ö½Å°ÅºÎ¸¦ Ŭ¸¯ÇÏ½Ã¸é ¶È°°Àº ¸ÞÀÏÀÌ ¹ß¼Ûµ
Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I think the Hurd libc implementation of tmpfile is at fault.
> > > POSIX.1 says there must be a file descriptor. Try this libc patch.
> >
> > Why do it this way? I would prefer having fileno ge
> At lunch I started a compile of oskit with gcc-3, and it appears to
> have built. I'm going to play with an all gcc-3 based
> oskit+oskit-mach when I get home tonight.
Ok. I don't know what to expect from this. The problems of compiler vs
linux drivers tend to be of the nature that an indivi
Title: Á¦2ȸ Ã湫°ø³ë·®ÇØÀü½ÂøÁ¦ ¾È³»
³²Çرº
ã¾Æ ¿À½Ã´Â ±æ
2002³â
4¿ù26~28ÀÏ(3ÀÏ°£) ³²ÇØÃæ·Ä»ç ¹× ³ë·®ÀÏ´ë¿¡¼ ¹®È°ü±¤ºÎ,°æ»ó³²µµ,³²Çرº,Çرºº»ºÎÀÇ
ÈÄ¿øÀ¸·Î Ã湫°ø³ë·®ÇØÀü½ÂøÁ¦ÀüÀ§¿øȸ ÁÖÃÖ·Î Á¦2ȸ
Ã湫°ø³ë·®ÇØÀü½ÂøÁ¦°¡ °³Ãֵ˴ϴÙ.
Áö±Ý ÀüÀïÀÌ ±ÞÇÏ´Ï
³ªÀÇ Á×
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't have my copy of POSIX around, but I also remember a vague
> requirement (or expectation) that the file descriptor allocated
> is always the smallest file descriptor available.
No, that's no requirement. It's the way Unix historically work
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 07:36:33PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Sure, but there is *no* difference between doing so immediately and
> > doing so upon demand...
>
> Sure there is. The basic requirement here is that the the OPEN_MAX limit
> be enforced as specified,
I don't have my copy of PO
Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sure there is. The basic requirement here is that the the OPEN_MAX limit
> be enforced as specified, on the total of fopen+tmpfile + open and other
> POSIX.1 calls (and probably some other ISO C call I am forgetting).
Ah, quite right, blech. I had
> Sure, but there is *no* difference between doing so immediately and
> doing so upon demand...
Sure there is. The basic requirement here is that the the OPEN_MAX limit
be enforced as specified, on the total of fopen+tmpfile + open and other
POSIX.1 calls (and probably some other ISO C call I am
Warning
Unable to process data:
multipart/mixed;boundary="=_NextPart_000_00A8_66A65A5C.E0765D41"
Title: Á¦¸ñ ¾øÀ½
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 05:04:57PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > I had a moment, so I decided to try building oskit-mach with
> > gcc-3.0. Note that this is linked against an oskit build with
> > gcc-2.95.4. It appears to work (boot, mount filesystem, ping
> > localhost)
> Great! Thanks fo
Warning
Unable to process data:
multipart/mixed;boundary="=_NextPart_000_00A4_08C74E3E.D8648B42"
> Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I think the Hurd libc implementation of tmpfile is at fault.
> > POSIX.1 says there must be a file descriptor. Try this libc patch.
>
> Why do it this way? I would prefer having fileno generate the file
> descriptor, since most uses of tmpfile
> I had a moment, so I decided to try building oskit-mach with gcc-3.0.
> Note that this is linked against an oskit build with gcc-2.95.4. It
> appears to work (boot, mount filesystem, ping localhost)
Great! Thanks for verifying that this works.
> Aside from the usual two patches, it compiled
I got an alpha*-*-gnu* target configuration put into the current GCC
sources, but that is not in any release yet. I think it might only go into
3.2, I'm not sure if 3.1 was frozen already when I sent the patch. I
suspect that you could apply those patches to 3.0.4 and have them work, but
probabl
Title: ¹«·ÊÇÏ°Ô À̸ÞÀÏÀ» º¸³»µå·Á Áø½ÉÀ¸·Î »çÁ˵帳´Ï´Ù
Á¤º¸Åë½ÅºÎ ±Ç°í »çÇ׿¡ ÀÇ°Å Á¦¸ñ¿¡
[±¤°í]¶ó°í Ç¥±âÇÑ ±¤°í ¸ÞÀÏÀÔ´Ï´Ù.¼ö½ÅÀ» ¿øÄ¡ ¾ÊÀ¸½Ã¸é
¼ö½Å°ÅºÎ¸¦
´·¯ÁÖ¼¼¿ä
¹«·ÊÇÏ°Ô
À̸ÞÀÏÀ» º¸³»µå·Á
Áø½ÉÀ¸·Î »çÁ˵帳´Ï´Ù.
º» ¸ÞÀÏÀÌ
°í°´´Ô²² ½ºÆÔÀÌ ¾Æ´Ñ
Á¤º¸·Î¼ÀÇ ¿ªÇ
º»¸ÞÀÏÀº ÀÎÅÍ³Ý °ø°³°Ô½ÃÆÇ¿¡¼ ÃßÃâ ÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç ¸ÞÀÏ ÁÖ¼Ò¿Ü¿¡ ¾Æ¹«·± Á¤º¸µµ °¡Áö°í ÀÖÁö ¾Ê½À´Ï´Ù.º»¸ÞÀÏÀº ÀÏȸ¼º ¸ÞÀϷμ ´Ù½Ã´Â ¹ß¼ÛµÇÁö ¾ÊÀ»°Í ÀÔ´Ï´Ù.Á¤º¸Åë½ÅºÎ ±ÔÁ¤¿¡ µû¶ó [Á¤º¸]¶ó°í Ç¥½ÃÇÏ°í,¼ö½ÅÀ» ¿øÄ¡ ¾ÊÀ¸½Ã¸é ¼ö½Å°ÅºÎ¸¦ ¿øÇÕ´Ï´Ù¸¦ Ŭ¸¯
ÇØÁֽøé Â÷ÈÄ¿¡´Â º¸³»Áö ¾ÊÀ» °ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù.
²ÞÀÇ ÇÁ·£Â÷
¾È³çÇϼ¼¿ä? ±¸Àα¸Á÷Á¤º¸ ¹× â¾÷Á¤º¸ Àü¹®»çÀÌÆ®
±Û·Î¹úÀâÀÔ´Ï´Ù¾ÆÁ÷ ¹ÌºñÇÑ Á¡ÀÌ ¸¹Áö¸¸ ÀÚÁÖ µé¸£¼Å¼ ÁÁÀº ±¸Àα¸Á÷ Á¤º¸ ¹×
â¾÷Á¤º¸¸¦ ¸¶À½²¯ µî·ÏÇØ ÁÖ¼¼¿ä.ÁÁÀºÇÏ·ç µÇ½Ã°í¿ä Çູ°ú Çà¿îÀÌ ±×´ë¿Í ÇÔ²²ÇÏ±æ ¹Ù¶ó¸¶Áö
¾Ê½À´Ï´Ù.
±Û·Î¹úÀâ
Title: ³õÄ¥¼ö¾ø´Â °øµ¿±¸¸Å¸¸ ¸ð¾Ò½À´Ï´Ù.
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
Title: [±¤°í]½É½ÉÇϽÃÁÒ? °ÔÀÓµµ ÇÏ°í °æÇ°µµ Ÿ¼¼¿ä!
±ÍÇÏÀÇ ½Â¶ô¾øÀÌ È«º¸¼º ÀüÀÚ ¿ìÆíÀ» º¸³»°Ô µÈ Á¡ Á¤ÁßÈ÷ »ç°ú µå¸³´Ï´Ù.
Á¤º¸Åë½Å¸ÁÀÌ¿ëÃËÁø¹ý ±ÔÁ¤À» ÁؼöÇÏ¿© ±¤°í¸ÞÀÏÀÓÀ» Ç¥½ÃÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ¼ö½Å
°ÅºÎ ÀåÄ¡¸¦ ¸¶·ÃÇÏ°í ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù. ±ÍÇÏÀÇ ÀüÀÚ ¿ìÆí ÁÖ¼Ò´Â ÀÎÅ
Warning
Unable to process data:
multipart/mixed;boundary="=_NextPart_000_00C8_54A41B3C.E5123D73"
Title: [±¤°í]½É½ÉÇϽÃÁÒ? °ÔÀÓµµ ÇÏ°í °æÇ°µµ Ÿ¼¼¿ä!
±ÍÇÏÀÇ ½Â¶ô¾øÀÌ È«º¸¼º ÀüÀÚ ¿ìÆíÀ» º¸³»°Ô µÈ Á¡ Á¤ÁßÈ÷ »ç°ú µå¸³´Ï´Ù.
Á¤º¸Åë½Å¸ÁÀÌ¿ëÃËÁø¹ý ±ÔÁ¤À» ÁؼöÇÏ¿© ±¤°í¸ÞÀÏÀÓÀ» Ç¥½ÃÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ¼ö½Å
°ÅºÎ ÀåÄ¡¸¦ ¸¶·ÃÇÏ°í ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù. ±ÍÇÏÀÇ ÀüÀÚ ¿ìÆí ÁÖ¼Ò´Â ÀÎÅ
>
>
>>Also, should anything specific need to be done to support a target
>>of a different architecture target for the HURD (i.e., alpha-gnu),
>>and if so, what?
>>
>
>I've never tried this, but here's a quick brainstorm of pieces you
>might have to touch:
>
>1) Gcc, to tell it that alpha-*-gnu is
Title: ¡Ø Çã¶ô¾øÀÌ È«º¸¸ÞÀÏÀ» º¸³»°Ô µÈ Á¡ »ç°úµå¸³´Ï´Ù.
¾È³çÇϼ¼¿ä. »çÀü¿¡ Çã¶ô¾øÀÌ ¸ÞÀÏÀ» º¸³»°Ô µÇ¾î
Á˼ÛÇÕ´Ï´Ù. ¸ÞÀÏ ÁÖ¼Ò´Â ÀÎÅÍ³Ý °Ô½ÃÆÇ, ¹æ¸í·Ï µî¿¡ ¿Ã¸° ±Û¿¡ Ç¥½ÃµÈ °Í°ú ÀÎÅÍ³Ý»ó¿¡ °ø°³µÈ °Í µîÀ» ¹«ÀÛÀ§·Î ¸ðÀº
°ÍÀ¸·Î °³ÀÎÁ¤º¸ ħÇØ¿Í´Â ¹«°üÇÕ´Ï´Ù. À¯¾Æ¾Æµ¿µµ¼¿¡ À¯¿ëÇÑ Á¤º¸¸¦ Àü´ÞÇϱâ
Title: [±¤°í]½É½ÉÇϽÃÁÒ? °ÔÀÓµµ ÇÏ°í
°æÇ°µµ Ÿ¼¼¿ä!
±ÍÇÏÀÇ ½Â¶ô¾øÀÌ È«º¸
¼º ÀüÀÚ ¿ìÆíÀ» º¸³»°Ô µÈ Á¡ Á¤ÁßÈ÷ »ç
°ú µå¸³´Ï´Ù.
Á¤º¸Åë½Å¸ÁÀÌ¿ëÃËÁø¹ý ±ÔÁ¤À»
ÁؼöÇÏ¿© ±¤°í¸Þ
ÀÏÀÓÀ» Ç¥½ÃÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ¼ö½Å
°ÅºÎ ÀåÄ¡¸¦ ¸¶·ÃÇÏ°í
ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù. ±ÍÇÏÀÇ ÀüÀÚ ¿ìÆ
Title: [±¤°í]½É½ÉÇϽÃÁÒ? °ÔÀÓµµ ÇÏ°í
°æÇ°µµ Ÿ¼¼¿ä!
±ÍÇÏÀÇ ½Â¶ô¾øÀÌ È«º¸
¼º ÀüÀÚ ¿ìÆíÀ» º¸³»°Ô µÈ Á¡ Á¤ÁßÈ÷ »ç
°ú µå¸³´Ï´Ù.
Á¤º¸Åë½Å¸ÁÀÌ¿ëÃËÁø¹ý ±ÔÁ¤À»
ÁؼöÇÏ¿© ±¤°í¸Þ
ÀÏÀÓÀ» Ç¥½ÃÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ¼ö½Å
°ÅºÎ ÀåÄ¡¸¦ ¸¶·ÃÇÏ°í
ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù. ±ÍÇÏÀÇ ÀüÀÚ ¿ìÆ
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 10:49:45PM -0600, Andrew M. Miklic wrote:
> I have tried to follow the instructions for building a
> cross-compiler from the HURD homepage, but I tried to download the
> lastest (3.0.4) instead of 2.95.2, and I can find no reference
> anywhere (in the config* files, either
Title: ´ëÃâÁß°³Àü¹®»çÀÌÆ®1588¹ðÅ©
Warning
Unable to process data:
multipart/mixed;boundary="=_NextPart_000_00D3_03C45C4A.B2816C16"
Warning
Unable to process data:
multipart/mixed;boundary="=_NextPart_000_00D8_31D12C2B.C2183D46"
36 matches
Mail list logo
