Re: ikiwiki fuckup...

Hi, On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 05:21:03PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 01:44:44AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > Now what about the promised Savannah backup? :-) > > Hmm? I wrote about that two weeks ago: >

Re: Final GSoC submission

Hi, On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 06:58:06AM -0400, Andrei Barbu wrote: > Apparently we're not allowed to be evaluated on anything we submit > after today at noon PDT. Well, Google is not really able (nor willing) to enforce strict adherence to this date... And anyways it could be bent by saying that

Re: The patch of glibc which allows the user to override the pfinet server

Hi, On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 01:57:18PM +0200, zhengda wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> It really depends on the context. In some cases -- if the pointer is >> dereferenced -- NULL will create an obvious failure, while some >> random uninitialized pointer might be harder to track down. >> >> I

Re: ikiwiki fuckup...

Hello! On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 01:44:44AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 04:04:51PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 08:54:40AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > The tricky part is that these changes were originally pushed to the > > > gi

Final GSoC submission

Hi, Apparently we're not allowed to be evaluated on anything we submit after today at noon PDT. I thought with that in mind I'd send in my submission. Final status update * Wrote docs * Cleaned up a bit, removed dead code * mach_wait_probe now handles the size of the memory returned,