he
> reasoning behind it. Not that "Serverboot V2" is a working name. We
> have yet to find a better name for it.
> ---
> hurd/bootstrap.mdwn | 7 +
> hurd/what_is_an_os_bootstrap.mdwn | 24 +
> open_issues/serverbootv2.mdwn | 899 +
open_issues/serverbootv2 is meant to inline the content.
* open_issues/serverbootv2.mdwn: Sergey proposed this new bootstrap
for the Hurd. This is a draft RFC document that explains the
reasoning behind it. Not that "Serverboot V2" is a working name. We
have yet to find a better name for it.
Hello!
I can confirm that ‘make dist’ works like a charm:
http://hydra.nixos.org/job/gnu/hurd-master/tarball
The latest tarball can be obtained from:
http://hydra.nixos.org/job/gnu/hurd-master/tarball/latest
Thanks,
Ludo’.
Hello,
Ludovic Courtès, le Sat 17 Jul 2010 20:21:55 +0200, a écrit :
> Comments?
Applied after update, thanks!
Samuel
Ludovic Courtès, le Wed 23 Mar 2011 19:24:18 +0100, a écrit :
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> > This is the potentially controversial patch. :-)
> >
> > It removes serverboot, which is no longer built since commit
> > dfa4d617a012dd46d3849e0d2538a4b7890c1306
Hello!
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> This is the potentially controversial patch. :-)
>
> It removes serverboot, which is no longer built since commit
> dfa4d617a012dd46d3849e0d2538a4b7890c1306 (Sept. 2004), and moves the
> files that are actually used by ‘mach-def
Hello,
To fix make dist, instead of fixing serverboot, Ludovic proposes to just
at last drop it.
Thoughts?
Samuel
Ludovic Courtès, le Sat 17 Jul 2010 20:21:55 +0200, a écrit :
> This is the potentially controversial patch. :-)
>
> It removes serverboot, which is no longer built sin
> Please let serverboot die a silent death, nobody should be using it.
Dead.
> Index: serverboot/ChangeLog
> 2004-09-03 Alfred M. Szmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Makefile (target): Variable removed.
That's
> Please let serverboot die a silent death, nobody should be using
> it.
Dead.
Thanks!
> Index: serverboot/ChangeLog
> 2004-09-03 Alfred M. Szmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>* Makefile (target): Variable removed.
That's a silly way to
Please let serverboot die a silent death, nobody should be using it.
Index: serverboot/ChangeLog
2004-09-03 Alfred M. Szmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Makefile (target): Variable removed.
Index: serverboot/Makefile
=
I put some changes into boot/boot_script.c that might fix this.
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
Hi,
In serverboot/bootstrap.c, the buffer allocated for the configuration
file is freed after the file is parsed. However, the parsing code in
boot/boot_script.c puts pointers to the buffer in the `cmds'
variables, which are used during execution of the script. So either
boot.c should mak
On 19 Dec 2002, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> "Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Corking.
> >
> >What's that mean?
> >
> > >From WordNet (r) 1.7 [wn]:
> >
> > corking
> >adj : (informal) very good; "a bully pulpit"; "a neat sports car";
> > "had a
> corking
>adj : (informal) very good; "a bully pulpit"; "a neat sports car";
> "had a great time at the party"; "you look simply
> smashing" [syn: {bang-up}, {bully}, {cracking}, {dandy},
> {great}, {groovy}, {keen}, {neat}, {nifty},
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Corking.
>
>What's that mean?
>
> >From WordNet (r) 1.7 [wn]:
>
> corking
>adj : (informal) very good; "a bully pulpit"; "a neat sports car";
> "had a great time at the party"; "you look simply
> smash
> Corking.
What's that mean?
>From WordNet (r) 1.7 [wn]:
corking
adj : (informal) very good; "a bully pulpit"; "a neat sports car";
"had a great time at the party"; "you look simply
smashing" [syn: {bang-up}, {bully}, {cracking}, {dandy},
{g
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Still, is the unused code somehow filtered out from the source tree
>> when a release is made?
>
>See hurd/Makefile.
>
> Corking.
What's that mean?
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTEC
> Still, is the unused code somehow filtered out from the source tree
> when a release is made?
See hurd/Makefile.
Corking.
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The problem with having them still in the tree is that it's not obvious
>> at a quick glance which tools are pieces aer still in use and worth
>> learning when you're a new person. As an example, when James Morrison
>> was doing pa
On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 09:08:59PM +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> Still, is the unused code somehow filtered out from the source tree
> when a release is made?
With automake yes. 'make dist' only pulls in the files that are
actively referenced in the make files. That is, incidentally, what I'
> The problem with having them still in the tree is that it's not obvious
> at a quick glance which tools are pieces aer still in use and worth
> learning when you're a new person. As an example, when James Morrison
> was doing patch reviews and sending a patch nearly every week a freq
Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The problem with having them still in the tree is that it's not obvious
> at a quick glance which tools are pieces aer still in use and worth
> learning when you're a new person. As an example, when James Morrison
> was doing patch reviews and sending a p
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 09:58:53AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> "Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >ufs-fsck is fsck for ufs, I belive that bsdfsck is the same thing only
> >rewritten.
> >
> > I mean the other way of course, ufs-fsck is a rewritten version of
> > b
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 09:58:06AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > Also, is there a reason to keep bsdfsck, defpager and libtreefs
> > around? About libtreefs I'm a bit unsure, since it might be useful.
> > But I doubt this since it hasn't been touched since 1996 (there is not
> > even a C
Why do you want to delete things like this?
Because I feel like it.
They are in-progress, it's in the CVS source, which is the right
place for things like that. Of course they are not in the release,
but that's a separate question.
Am I wrong to say that libtreefs is obsolete, dead
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>ufs-fsck is fsck for ufs, I belive that bsdfsck is the same thing only
>rewritten.
>
> I mean the other way of course, ufs-fsck is a rewritten version of
> bsdfsck. Please correct me if this _not_ the case.
You are correct. bsdfsck is the
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also, is there a reason to keep bsdfsck, defpager and libtreefs
> around? About libtreefs I'm a bit unsure, since it might be useful.
> But I doubt this since it hasn't been touched since 1996 (there is not
> even a ChangeLog).
Why do you want to
ufs-fsck is fsck for ufs, I belive that bsdfsck is the same thing only
rewritten.
I mean the other way of course, ufs-fsck is a rewritten version of
bsdfsck. Please correct me if this _not_ the case.
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
h
Is bsdfsck just fsck for ufs? If yes, it should probably be renamed for
consistency.
ufs-fsck is fsck for ufs, I belive that bsdfsck is the same thing only
rewritten.
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listin
On Wed, 2002-12-18 at 03:50, M. Gerards wrote:
> > Also, is there a reason to keep bsdfsck, defpager and libtreefs
> > around? About libtreefs I'm a bit unsure, since it might be useful.
> > But I doubt this since it hasn't been touched since 1996 (there is not
> > even a ChangeLog).
Is bsdfsck j
Why do you want to remove bsdfsck?
bsdfsck is duplicate code of ufs-fsck AFAICS.
Can someone please explain what libtreefs does, why it exists and
what is missing? I think most people (including me) don't have an
idea.
It is (was) a library for tree structured translators, it exists
> Also, is there a reason to keep bsdfsck, defpager and libtreefs
> around? About libtreefs I'm a bit unsure, since it might be useful.
> But I doubt this since it hasn't been touched since 1996 (there is not
> even a ChangeLog).
Why do you want to remove bsdfsck? I think it will be used more oft
Convenience for the hackers who really hack is one of the most
persuasive arguments on any subject in the project. GRUB is great
for multiboot support and nothing else is so great. Other things
are better in other ways and not so great for multiboot support.
Can't you pass the module
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> Is anyone using serverboot anymore? If not, then it could maybe be
> removed.
FYI, the severboot option was removed from the GRUB floppy image
distributed with the K1 image.
Phil.
--
Philip Charles; 39a Paterson Street, Abbotsford, Dunedi
> Your arument about not removing serverboot is to have only one thing
> to paste? Please, you can do better. If that was the case we could
> skip using the multiboot stuff in grub and use serverboot instead
> since it is less to type or whatever.
Convenience for the hackers who re
serverboot is still handy if you're not using GRUB, but
e.g. mkmbimage with netboot or mklinuximage or suchlike (to have
only one thing to paste in there).
Your arument about not removing serverboot is to have only one thing
to paste? Please, you can do better. If that was the ca
> Is anyone using serverboot anymore? If not, then it could maybe be
> removed.
serverboot is still handy if you're not using GRUB, but e.g. mkmbimage with
netboot or mklinuximage or suchlike (to have only one thing to paste in there).
_
Is anyone using serverboot anymore? If not, then it could maybe be
removed.
Also, is there a reason to keep bsdfsck, defpager and libtreefs
around? About libtreefs I'm a bit unsure, since it might be useful.
But I doubt this since it hasn't been touched since 1996 (there is not
even a
On Sat, Mar 23, 2002 at 06:53:09PM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2002 at 08:38:37PM -0500, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> > I don't expect that anyone is still using serverboot since we've had
> > boot script support in the kernel for a while now.
>
>
> I have been actively recommending serverboot over the bootscript
> method. In almost all cases where people show up on irc with boot
> problems, I tell them to switch to serverboot and it solves the
> problems.
Of the installations that I have done, I have had no problems.
> I have been actively recommending serverboot over the bootscript
> method. In almost all cases where people show up on irc with boot
> problems, I tell them to switch to serverboot and it solves the
> problems.
I wish I'd known this. We've had positive reports about ke
On Sat, Mar 23, 2002 at 08:38:37PM -0500, Roland McGrath wrote:
> I don't expect that anyone is still using serverboot since we've had
> boot script support in the kernel for a while now.
I have been actively recommending serverboot over the bootscript
method. In almost all ca
I have just checked in changes that excise the default pager functionality
from serverboot. The $(paging-file) et al boot script functions are still
recognized, but now just print a message telling you to use swapon. The
magic "die $(serverboot)" line is ignored completely, and serv
Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> In boot, we incorrectly setup the default kernel_command_line.
>
> Eh? Isn't the kernel's name part of a real kernel command line?
This is correct. Thus, we are looking at a different bug; in the
general case, we only pass options to init when usin
> There was a problem with the output.
Well then you should have described it in your bug report!
> I think that the problem what I was seeing is that the strings are
> generally longer than 80 characters. Thus, they wrap onto the next
> line. In fact, the first module that is loaded on my sys
>> This patch also corrects the output: I have no clue what the padding with
>> spaces was all about, however, it seems to me to be completely
>> superfluous; the output is now consistent with other messages.
>
> Was there a problem with the output, or is this an aesthetic change?
There was a p
> In boot, we incorrectly setup the default kernel_command_line.
Eh? Isn't the kernel's name part of a real kernel command line?
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
> I have confirmed that the following combinations, first with your code
> and then, with my new patches, work:
Thanks!
> > [subhurd] new hurd's boot -> old boot script -> old hurd
>
> Check. However, I fail to see why we even want to be compatible here;
My rationale was that one might want t
I have confirmed that the following combinations, first with your code
and then, with my new patches, work:
> new gnumach -> new hurd's serverboot -> new hurd
Check.
> new gnumach -> old hurd's serverboot -> old hurd
Check.
> old gnumach -> new hurd'
> Can you check if trailing spaces are correctly stripped?
They were not. I just checked in a fix for that. Please test it.
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 05:13:34AM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> The first thing to test with the new kernel is that an old-style boot still
> works. It checks if there is exactly one multiboot module and its module
> string contains no spaces (i.e. "/boot/serverboot"), an
51 matches
Mail list logo
