Michael Lucas schrieb:
>
> So, if you're a sysadmin who likes to be pendantic, do please drop me
> a line!
Been there, done that, doing it still. May I help with my i18n
experience (sorry, no two-byte languages, just plain old German --
pitfalls start at choosing the right keyboard layout).
-
Jan Mikkelsen wrote:
> Comeau C++, http://www.comeaucomputing.com might do what you want,
> although you'll have to hack at the build system a bit. Other products
> based on the EDG front end might do similar things. I seem to recall
> that KAI C++ converted to C, but I don't know.
True!
But
Comeau C++, http://www.comeaucomputing.com might do what you want,
although you'll have to hack at the build system a bit. Other products
based on the EDG front end might do similar things. I seem to recall
that KAI C++ converted to C, but I don't know.
-Original Message-
From: Rayson H
I requested the bug list for that ``compiler'' at one point and was
given hundreds of sheets of ``known bugs'' (several bugs per sheet).
At the time, I was looking for alternatives to g++ because of a bug
I'd come across. Needless to say, the bug in question appeared in
the cfront known-bugs
The original Stroustrop AT&T C++ complier called cfront was a front-end C
compiler. They may have it available at research.att.com. It's missing some
things, though, like generic container classes.
-Original Message-
From: Rayson Ho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 20
Hi,
I have written some code in C++. However, I want to run it on an old
mainframe machine, which a C++ compiler is not available.
I know that the old g++ is a C++ to C compiler. Does anyone know which
version it is? Also, anyone knows other C++ to C compilers?
Thanks,
Rayson
On 2001-07-03, Michael Lucas scribbled:
# I'm looking for a couple brave souls who would be willing to be
# technical reviewers.
I probably have some time on my hands to help out in anyway that I can.
I'm no BSD genius... but I'm not a newbie either :)
# I have plenty of people who are tracking
Hello,
For those who haven't heard my occasional panicked gasps for freedom
on -chat, I'm writing a book on FreeBSD. It's called "Absolute BSD",
and is due for publication roughly around BSDCon 2002. There's a
signed contract and everything, so it's pretty much a guaranteed
thing.
I'm looking
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 07:42:57PM -0400, Felix-Antoine Paradis wrote:
> Is /etc/sysctl.conf what you are looking for?
No, because that only holds the runtime tuneables.
- alex
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Andre Grosse Bley wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> Sorry, but i did not know how i can describe these troubles better.
> But: I applyed your patch, set net.inet.tcp.tcp_seq_genscheme: 1 -> 0
> and both scp/LPRng work again.
Good.
> > Note that the patch addresses _only_ problems with
In a message dated 07/03/2001 12:58:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > Imagine a complete 80186 system with 512k RAM and 512K flash disk, two
> > > serial ports, 14 digital IO lines and an Ethernet in a 32 pin DIL
> package.
> > > They are planning to replace the
[ not -hackers material, moved to questions ]
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 01:53:43PM -0700, Randy -Harborside Internet wrote:
> We are having a problem with our mail server. It recently got
> upgraded to 4.3 from 4.2, and now it is having problems with the TX
> buffer somehow on the network card. Eve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
We are having a problem with our mail server. It recently got
upgraded to 4.3 from 4.2, and now it is having problems with the TX
buffer somehow on the network card. Every once in awhile it will shut
off all network traffic and give these errors:
no
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We can "picture" it, but such a system can't route a full 100mb/s ethernet,
> so its fairly useless as a network device/router as is proposed here.
You're a real guru. Right. ISDN gives you about raw 192 kBit/s (144 kBit/s
on the S0 bus)
> Mike Smith([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.07.02 23:01:42 +:
> >=20
> > Be aware that ftpd is likely to be replaced in the near future, as=20
> > there's a strong desire to converge on the LukeM FTP tools.
>
> no matter how nice lukemftpd looks (i got it running on several boxes
> since it was the
> Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 03:17:12 -0700
> From: Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > who_has_lock++ ;
> > who_has_lock %= process_count ;
>
> Your unsimplified assembly is not happy, and neither is
> this. You want to use a LOCK CMPXCHG to implement your
> mutexes; the LOCK pre
On 03.07.2001 22:39:15 +, kostas wrote:
[doesn't this belong on -questions?]
> Where can i find a hardware compatibility list for the x86 platform?
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/i386/4.3-RELEASE/HARDWARE.TXT
/Michael
--
Michael Lyngbøl -- michael at lyngbol dot dk
TDC Tele D
Where can i find a hardware compatibility list for
the x86 platform?
Kostas Chortarias
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 07/03/2001 11:57:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > > Now try to imagine a whole PC on a smaller board than a PIII CPU
> > > cartridge. If you can't, get a copy of the Embedded Systems magazine
> >
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Mike Smith wrote:
> I'm new to FreeBSD (come from the *gasp* System V and RTU world) so I
> hope this is the correct list for this. ( I'm sure I will be told if
> it's not :-} )
You probably should ahve asked in "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" as it's not
a very technical question, but
Mike Smith([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.07.02 23:01:42 +:
>
> Be aware that ftpd is likely to be replaced in the near future, as
> there's a strong desire to converge on the LukeM FTP tools.
no matter how nice lukemftpd looks (i got it running on several boxes
since it was the only choice for pl
In a message dated 07/03/2001 11:57:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Now try to imagine a whole PC on a smaller board than a PIII CPU
> > cartridge. If you can't, get a copy of the Embedded Systems magazine
> > and look at the pictures in it.
>
> Imagine a complet
omit the space?
/k
Ian Trudel([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.07.02 11:43:11 +:
> Hello,
>
> msgs reminded me the old UNIX news command and then, I started to
> fiddle around it. As I want to post stuff, it works good with msgs -s.
> However, in the man pages, they suggest:
>
> The line
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 12:26:58PM -0400, a little birdie told me
that Mike Smith remarked
> I'm new to FreeBSD (come from the *gasp* System V and RTU world) so I
> hope this is the correct list for this. ( I'm sure I will be told if
> it's not :-} )
>
> Is there ANY penalty for having a device i
I'm new to FreeBSD (come from the *gasp* System V and RTU world) so I
hope this is the correct list for this. ( I'm sure I will be told if
it's not :-} )
Is there ANY penalty for having a device in your config file that is not
in your system??
I am inheriting a 40 machine laboratory. My predeces
On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 11:01:42PM -0700, Mike Smith wrote:
>
> Be aware that ftpd is likely to be replaced in the near future, as
> there's a strong desire to converge on the LukeM FTP tools.
I'm surprised.
I don't see big wins - at least for ftpd.
Well the -r option looks fine but shouldn't b
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sergey
Babkin) wrote:
> Now try to imagine a whole PC on a smaller board than a PIII CPU
> cartridge. If you can't, get a copy of the Embedded Systems magazine
> and look at the pictures in it.
Imagine a complete 80186 system with 512k RAM and 5
David Terrell wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 01:42:36PM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
> > in fact, the require keyword isn't sufficient in it's own. there
> > should be pre_require and post_require keywords since nfsd needs to
> > start mountd before to start nfsd then rpc.statd and rpc.lockd
Sergey Babkin wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Entire PIII MBs are available for under $60. Your concept that the delta in
> > cost between a 486 chipset and PIII is more that that is utterly ridiculous
> > PIII chipsets and 486 chipsets cost the same in quantity. Try using a
> > resou
Brian Dean wrote:
> Caveats: This patch won't do the right thing on SMP systems. The
> debug registers are set/cleared only for the CPU running ddb.
> Since the debug registers are a per-cpu thing, they won't be
> set for the other CPUs. I'll work on that next.
FWIW:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Entire PIII MBs are available for under $60. Your concept
> that the delta in cost between a 486 chipset and PIII is
> more that that is utterly ridiculous PIII chipsets and 486
> chipsets cost the same in quantity. Try using a resource
> other than your Radio Shack cata
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Again, you are only considering your personal case. If
> > crypto should be needed on an embedded appliance, I don't
> > think they would need a lightning-fast processor and VGA
> > support, when crypto is all they want.
>
> Your premise that "embedded appliances
Len Conrad wrote:
>
> I need about 1000 processes for a high-volume mail gateway.
> I´m already getting errors in peak periods with the default
> maxproc of 530.
>
> It seems I can´t set this in loader.conf, as I can other
> read-only params.
>
> Do I have to install the source and recompile?
"Michael C . Wu" wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 05:47:49AM +, E.B. Dreger scribbled:
> | 1. Is AIO SMP-safe?
>
> AIO is not safe, SMP or not.
Are you maybe confusion AIO (a POSIX mandated API) with
async mounts?
AIO works fine, I think, and is happy with SMP.
-- Terry
To Unsubscribe:
Nate Williams wrote:
> Actually, it's the reason that Sun is doing the dance with us right
> now. The whole Java affair has been a series of mis-steps by all
> parties (myself, BSDi, and Sun), so no one party shares the entire
> blame. The most recent issue was the BSDi/WindRiver acquisition,
>
"E.B. Dreger" wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:44:43 -0500
> > From: Michael C . Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > The issue is a lot more complicated than what you think.
>
> How so? I know that idleproc and the new ipending / threaded INTs
> enter the picture... and, after seeing the "HLT
"E.B. Dreger" wrote:
> [ libc_r locks don't assert "lock", not MP-safe ]
>
> So the "lock" prefix is the only way to enforce cache coherency?
> Do you have handy a good reference on IPIs, other than the kernel
> APIC code (and, of course, Google and NorthernLight searches)?
See other posting.
>
Idea Receiver wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > If you "need" kernel threads, look at the Linux kernel
> > threads in the ports collection (it's a kernel module
> > that builds and installs as a package). You probably
> > don't, since performance of kernel threads is really o
"E.B. Dreger" wrote:
> Any good references on MP standard? Is the lock prefix
> the only way to force cache coherency?
Cache coherency is managed by the MESI (modified,
exclusive, shared, invalid) protocol, in hardware.
The basic issue that the lock addresses is provision
of a barrier instructi
> Brian Somers wrote:
>
> > The only strange occurrence I've seen that sounds even vaguely
> > similar is that if you leave out a nameserver line in
> > /compat/linux/etc/hosts, it *doesn't* default to 127.1.
> >
> > Try adding a nameserver line (if you haven't already got one).
>
> Thanks
40 matches
Mail list logo
