Re: Bug fix to /proc/cpuinfo implementation

2004-06-28 Thread Tomas Ukkonen
On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 19:21, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > Tomas, > > On Jun 23 16:18, Tomas Ukkonen wrote: > > Hi > > > > I hope I email to correct mailing list... > not really. It's [EMAIL PROTECTED] usually. > > ...it's a border case in terms of licensing. In theory it's a bit too > big to fit

RE: Bug fix to /proc/cpuinfo implementation

2004-06-23 Thread Chris January
> Hi > > I hope I email to correct mailing list... > > It seems that '/proc/cpuinfo' doesn't report 3dnow and > 3dnowext support correctly. > > Because I had been using it for recognizing processor > features I looked briefly into fhandler_proc.cc (taken > freshly from cvs) and I think I fixe

Re: Bug fix to /proc/cpuinfo implementation

2004-06-23 Thread Corinna Vinschen
Tomas, On Jun 23 16:18, Tomas Ukkonen wrote: > Hi > > I hope I email to correct mailing list... not really. It's [EMAIL PROTECTED] usually. > It seems that '/proc/cpuinfo' doesn't report 3dnow and 3dnowext support > correctly. > > Because I had been using it for recognizing processor features

Bug fix to /proc/cpuinfo implementation

2004-06-23 Thread Tomas Ukkonen
Hi I hope I email to correct mailing list... It seems that '/proc/cpuinfo' doesn't report 3dnow and 3dnowext support correctly. Because I had been using it for recognizing processor features I looked briefly into fhandler_proc.cc (taken freshly from cvs) and I think I fixed the problem. The chan