roblem
as the SysV semaphores, where they block the entire process,
allowing the same deadlock situation to occur. Has this flock()
behavior changed in CURRENT?
It seems like this behavior is much more likely to change than
the SysV code.
Thanks!
Brian Smith
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
a deadlock situation).
Is this the recommended method of preventing these problems?
(the SysV semaphore is protecting shared memory accessed by
multiple processes).
Thanks for the info... it explains alot!
Brian Smith
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe fre
T?
Thanks!
Brian Smith
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
s, but no checksum or other link-specific fields.
Ok thanks, I am going to be working to add netgraph support to the
ATM code, who would I contact about getting changes committed
once I have the code working?
Brian Smith
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
submitted patches to the kernel for cyrix code optimizations. :)
I looked into netgraph and it seems to be a very modular and a wise
approach to take if it sufficient for this purpose.
Brian Smith
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
of any efforts to add PPP over ATM or Netgraph
support to the current ATM code?
Brian Smith
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
all together, preferably with netgraph
>as the framework
>to do so.
Well it is for DSL but, the adapter he has is already supported by FreeBSD.
Just the PPP over ATM is an issue.
Brian Smith
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
ect place to be posting but I
figured it could't hurt.
Thanks!
Brian Smith
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
