On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 12:04:58AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 1 June 2012 23:52, Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> > Of course. ??Sit down and write code.
>
> If I ever find the time, I just might. Do we have a wiki page listing
> the set of functions which we don't yet have?
>
I don't know. I don't
On 1 June 2012 23:52, Steve Kargl wrote:
> Of course. Sit down and write code.
If I ever find the time, I just might. Do we have a wiki page listing
the set of functions which we don't yet have?
--
Eitan Adler
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailin
On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 05:16:03PM -0700, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 1 June 2012 17:03, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> > On 2012-Jun-01 10:29:13 -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> >>On Friday, June 01, 2012 1:55:10 am Eitan Adler wrote:
> >>> Also, are there BSD licensed naive implementations of these functions
>
On 1 June 2012 17:03, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2012-Jun-01 10:29:13 -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
>>On Friday, June 01, 2012 1:55:10 am Eitan Adler wrote:
>>> Also, are there BSD licensed naive implementations of these functions
>>> we can use? Would it be okay to has slow, but accurate versions of
On 2012-Jun-01 10:29:13 -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
>On Friday, June 01, 2012 1:55:10 am Eitan Adler wrote:
>> Also, are there BSD licensed naive implementations of these functions
>> we can use? Would it be okay to has slow, but accurate versions of
>> these functions as a stopgap?
>
>Peter Jeremy
On 2012-Jun-01 20:50:24 +0200, Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
>Why is xargs even calling /bin/echo when "utility" is not specified.
Because that's what it's documented as doing.
>Shouldn't it just print a certain number of arguments (one in this
>case)?
The current approach is simpler - there's always
On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 07:20:42 +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2012-May-30 13:27:03 +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> >On 2012-May-29 02:18:25 +0400, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
> >>Then you should try to profile it - my script basically runs
> >>delete-old delete-old-libs for every knob (131 of them), an
On 2012-05-28 1:25, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> Here's a revised patch (based on something I brought up earlier)
> that converts periodic over to an rc.subr-like paradigm.
> This can be directly applied to HEAD; you will need to backport
> r231849 first if you want to apply the patch to 9-STABL
On Friday, June 01, 2012 1:55:10 am Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 31 May 2012 08:45, John Baldwin wrote:
> > I do think we should provide something in ports as an interim solution.
> > There are other 3rd party applications looking to drop FreeBSD support
> > because we are missing APIs that almost all
2012/6/1 Adrian Chadd :
> Hi,
>
> Please file a bug. :)
>
Here it goes:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=168530
> WEP shouldn't be broken in 9.x, that was before all of my TX
> aggregation changes for 802.11n support.
>
Don't know if it is... since my other stuff working in same networ
Hi,
Please file a bug. :)
WEP shouldn't be broken in 9.x, that was before all of my TX
aggregation changes for 802.11n support.
WEP worked fine for me when I was using it a couple weeks ago. Would
you please provide further information in the bug, such as what the
key length is, which key slots
Hello all.
First of all, I'm not on current, but on stable:
FreeBSD pcbsd-6648 9.0-STABLE FreeBSD 9.0-STABLE #8: Fri May 18
16:12:29 UTC 2012
r...@build9x64.pcbsd.org:/usr/obj/builds/i386/pcbsd-build90/fbsd-source/9.0/sys/GENERIC
i386
I have lenovo s10-2 (which is have some unsupported broadcom
> Do we have a wiki page listing the functions in libm we are missing?
> Having some kind of place to track progress and figure out what
> exactly is needed is the first step to getting these APIs into shape.
I already suggested this, and mentioned:
http://wiki.freebsd.org/MissingMathStuff
> Als
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:00:08PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 29, 2012 7:17:01 pm Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 01:08:24PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > On Monday, May 21, 2012 5:45:19 am Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> > > > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 09:42:17
> > I do think we should provide something in ports as an interim solution.
> > There are other 3rd party applications looking to drop FreeBSD support
> > because we are missing APIs that almost all other OS's have. I'm fine
> > if the interim lives in ports and that we don't import substandard
>
15 matches
Mail list logo
