Hi!
The root filesystem and the one backing ~/ are two separate instances of
ext2fs. I just ran »dh -h ~/« , and noticed on the GNU Mach console:
»task e19b6e10 deallocating an invalid port 1047, most probably a bug.«
As it is one of the few Mach tasks that don't get a proper name set (as
far as
If the device master port is given, a boot-time exec server can print
diagnostic messages earlier.
* exec/main.c (opt_device_master): New variable.
(OPT_DEVICE_MASTER_PORT): New macro.
(options): New set of options.
(parse_opt): New function.
(trivfs_append_args): Likewise.
(argp): Pull the argp d
Hey Thomas :)
Quoting Thomas Schwinge (2014-09-23 12:26:01)
> Hi!
>
> The root filesystem and the one backing ~/ are two separate instances of
> ext2fs. I just ran »dh -h ~/« , and noticed on the GNU Mach console:
> »task e19b6e10 deallocating an invalid port 1047, most probably a bug.«
> As it
Hi Thomas, hi Samuel :)
I understand you took care of the release process last time. Is this
process documented somewhere? I think that we should make another
round of releases. In fact, we should make one or two releases each
year. At the very least it brings us quite a bit of attention.
If
0.6? Or, make it obvious that it is just a
snapshot, and thus call that GNU Hurd 20140923 or similar?
Grüße,
Thomas
pgpbR8NwZMqCe.pgp
Description: PGP signature
een one year ago.)
>
> Given this, and with our last Hurd release having been 0.5, what would
> the next version be? 0.5.1? 0.6? Or, make it obvious that it is just a
> snapshot, and thus call that GNU Hurd 20140923 or similar?
I suggest time-based releases, using a 0.x scheme (unt
ke. Now is a good time, you say? (I'm not
> > disagreeing -- the previous release having been one year ago.)
> >
> > Given this, and with our last Hurd release having been 0.5, what would
> > the next version be? 0.5.1? 0.6? Or, make it obvious that it is just
Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> skribis:
> I understand you took care of the release process last time. Is this
> process documented somewhere? I think that we should make another
> round of releases. In fact, we should make one or two releases each
> year. At the very least
I would think that an annual release, or a release every 2 years, coupled
with a snapshot every 2 month, would be the best for most people.
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> skribis:
>
> > I understand you took care of the
