On Tue, 2002-03-12 at 17:19, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Missing arguments. Though it does not work, now it even fails on the
> first ioctl. Personally, I want to have losetup on BFs anyways.
OK, yeah, let's do it.
p.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Tr
Moin Phil!
Phil Blundell schrieb am Tuesday, den 12. March 2002:
> +int set_loop(const char *device, const char *file, int offset, int *loopro)
...
> +exit(set_loop2(device));
Missing arguments. Though it does not work, now it even fails on the
first ioctl. Personally, I want to have losetup
On Tue, 2002-03-12 at 14:35, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> In last days, I tried to find the reason for the ugly behaviour of the
> loop driver, see #135504. I tried to reuser the code from losetup.c,
> nothing did work. A loop device created by losetup can be attached and
> detached as usual, but if done
In last days, I tried to find the reason for the ugly behaviour of the
loop driver, see #135504. I tried to reuser the code from losetup.c,
nothing did work. A loop device created by losetup can be attached and
detached as usual, but if done from debootstrap, it works once, leaves a
[loop0] zombie
4 matches
Mail list logo
