Terry Lambert wrote:
Joe Kelsey wrote:
/* name must start with a '/' but not contain one. */
if (*name != '/' || len < 2 || index(name + 1, '/') != NULL) {
free(ret, M_SEM);
retur
Mike Barcroft wrote:
Sounds like a bug to me. Could you open a PR?
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/46239
/Joe
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Terry Lambert wrote:
Get me the exact file you are concerned about, and I will stare
at it with you. I think, though, that if there is a problem, it's
just that you are catching things in mid-implementation (POSIX
semaphores were supported in the other scope, but not system,
until very recently;
Garrett Wollman wrote:
< said:
So, is there some mechanism I am missing? Is there a layer between the
application calling sem_open and the kernel receiving the parameters
that strips it down to the last component? If there is a higher level
involved here, why is the low-level ksem_create f
Terry Lambert wrote:
Joe Kelsey wrote:
I have been looking at the implementation of POSIX semaphores in
-CURRENT. I noticed that there are several missing pieces, specifically
the man pages and the removal of uthread_sem.c from libc_r.
I suppose the man pages are not critical, but it seems
I have been looking at the implementation of POSIX semaphores in
-CURRENT. I noticed that there are several missing pieces, specifically
the man pages and the removal of uthread_sem.c from libc_r.
I suppose the man pages are not critical, but it seems silly to keep
uthread_sem.c in libc_r if t
Terry Lambert writes:
> I don't think Joe is debating; I think he wants to have a
> meta-discussion about what the problem space looks like,
> before submitting patches that light up his little corner,
> and dark up everything else.
Thank you, Terry. Maybe I need to bring up the issue on -ar
David O'Brien writes:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 05:47:07PM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
> > What is so hard about allowing someone to specify the list of frontends
> > to provide at system build time? I thought that gcc was supposed to be
> > a modular compiler system,
Terry Lambert writes:
> I don't think Joe is debating; I think he wants to have a
> meta-discussion about what the problem space looks like,
> before submitting patches that light up his little corner,
> and dark up everything else.
Thank you, Terry. Maybe I need to bring up the issue on -ar
David O'Brien writes:
Thank you, David, for taking the time to answer the questions. Your
answers were clear. I appreciate you taking the time to provide these
answers.
/Joe
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
David O'Brien writes:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 05:47:07PM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
> > What is so hard about allowing someone to specify the list of frontends
> > to provide at system build time? I thought that gcc was supposed to be
> > a modular compiler system,
David O'Brien writes:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 05:23:32PM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
> > It is plain that many people will want to be able to install a version
> > of gcc that is officially supported and that also includes *all* of the
> > standard platforms th
It is plain that many people will want to be able to install a version
of gcc that is officially supported and that also includes *all* of the
standard platforms that come as part of the gcc release.
What is so wrong with being able to specify a compilation flag that says
"install all of the extr
Lyndon Nerenberg writes:
> > The convention was to use ``uucp'' as the default anonymous login
> > service.
>
> I think we're talking about two different things. Yes, many
> UNIX distributions shipped with a passwordless 'uucp' account
> with uucico as the shell. My comments about the 'nuuc
Lyndon Nerenberg writes:
> > "Garrett" == Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Garrett> I remember, back in the mists of ancient time, it was
> Garrett> common practice to provide ``anonymous UUCP'' service
> Garrett> along the lines of anonymous FTP in (what was a
Joe Kelsey writes:
> Maxim Sobolev writes:
> > Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> >
> > > Assignment:
> > >
> > > There is no reason for the NCCD constant to exist anymore.
> > >
> > > The CCD driver already has cloning suppor
Maxim Sobolev writes:
> Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> > Assignment:
> >
> > There is no reason for the NCCD constant to exist anymore.
> >
> > The CCD driver already has cloning support but CCDs "softc"
> > structure is statically allocated for NCCD devices.
> >
> > Change the CCD driver
Kazutaka YOKOTA writes:
> Anyway, I am now considering the following experiment.
>
> - We make the psm driver count the number of the "out-of-sync" errors.
> - When the error is detected for the first time, the psm driver will
> throw few data bytes (up to entire packet size) and see if it
OK already. I am sick and tired of this documentation discussion and it
appears that it is too hot of a topic for this list.
However, I have one last comment to make. TWO people have written to me
and said that the reason THEY write documentation in their "day" jobs is
that they get PAID for it
Warner Losh writes:
> Good Tone:
> Say Warner, why do you bother turning off the power after
> you suspend a socket. Shouldn't the power routines take care
> of that? Is there something subtle that's going on? Maybe a
> comment is in order?
>
> Bad Tone:
> Plea
OK, so we have beaten the psm and keyboard code to death. The entire
point that I have been trying to make in this discussion is that it is
imperative to document design decisions somewhere that is likely to
survive changes in maintainer.
I have been working as an administrator and programmer fo
Warner Losh writes:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Joe Kelsey writes:
> : I also second Terry's comment about 0x800. There is no reason to add
> : yet more driver flags in order to "do the right thing". The "do the
> : right thing" case should al
David O'Brien writes:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 11:22:17AM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
> > Basically, /usr/local is for anything the local administration wants to
> > officially support. The ports use of this (and by extension,
> > pre-compiled ports (packages)) is
Joe Kelsey writes:
> When the BSD started, they tried to distinguish between /usr/local and
> /usr/public, but that never took hold. Certainly, when GNU
> distributions started, the FSF very quickly took up the then default
> (from the long history of standardized distribu
Mike Meyer writes:
> Sure, the software in ports/packages aren't part of FreeBSD. Using
> that to claim they should have the same status or treatment as locally
> written or maintained software is a rationalization.
You are simply wrong in your characterization of /usr/local. As far
back as I
Mike Meyer writes:
> If memory serves (and it may not at this remove), /usr/local/bin
> wasn't on my path until I started using VAXen, meaning there were few
> or no packages installing in /usr/local on v6 & v7 on the 11s.
If you remember v6 and v7, then please enumerate the packages which
ins
26 matches
Mail list logo
