On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 12:43:09PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
| It's a complex task. Not insurmountable, but you will find it
| difficult. We all still want you to do the work for us while
| we sit in our armchairs and comment, though... 8-).
Maybe I'd be better off with the Junior Kernel Hack
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 11:22:38AM -0400, Kenneth Culver wrote:
| Oh, I didn't realize the userland threads implementations on -current and
| -stable differed that much. Good luck!
'Good luck!'
I keep getting that. I wonder if that's an omen.
jm
--
My other computer is your Windows box.
To
| Just curious, but what does doing this port get you?
Better threading performance and less bugs in Java, so I'm told. I was
looking for a Java on BSD project, and this is what I was given.
jm
--
My other computer is your Windows box.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "un
Also, I'm a bit weak (read: clueless) about dynamic linking. Where is a
good place to start? Or is the libc_r issue fundamentally different?
jm
--
My other computer is your Windows box.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the messa
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 10:09:13AM -0400, Michael Lucas wrote:
| On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 03:03:19PM +0100, Jonathon McKitrick wrote:
| > On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 09:45:49AM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote:
| > | You're going to have to keep the hashtable method of locking
| > | FILEs.
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 09:45:49AM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote:
| You're going to have to keep the hashtable method of locking
| FILEs.
So is this project much more complicated than simply resolving symbols and
dropping unused calls?
jm
--
My other computer is your Windows box.
To Unsubscribe
I've volunteered to do this port, with the expectation that it's within my
ability. I'm just a bit over my head, but that's how I'll learn, right?
I've gotten the -current version to build and install, but I've found 2
problems so far: gkrellm loads and cannot resolve the symbol _flockfile.
Als
| OIC. Just trying to get more information out.
Still appreciated.
I just didn't want my joke to *totally* go to waste, pathetic though
it was. :-)
jm
--
My other computer is your Windows box.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 07:39:35AM -0500, Larry Rosenman wrote:
| On Fri, 2002-08-16 at 07:35, Jonathon McKitrick wrote:
| > | > Why don't they just add an extra CPU to handle the GUI?? ;-)
| > |
| > | They did. 4.0.2 was the ES/MP (Enhanced Security/Multi Processing)
| >
Sorry, my last email was sent prematurely. I hit 'send' a bit too
soon.
| > Why don't they just add an extra CPU to handle the GUI?? ;-)
|
| They did. 4.0.2 was the ES/MP (Enhanced Security/Multi Processing)
I thought only NT did that. I was *trying* to be funny. :-)
| Not really. A lo
| > Why don't they just add an extra CPU to handle the GUI?? ;-)
|
| They did. 4.0.2 was the ES/MP (Enhanced Security/Multi Processing)
I thought only NT-SMP did that. I *thought* I was being funny. :-)
| Not really. A lot of them are rehashing things we've known
| for a long time, and UNI
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 04:17:28AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
| Jonathon McKitrick wrote:
| > A couple of months ago, I saw a note on daemonnews that there was a
| > patch for a proportional share scheduler. When would this work better
| > than the existing priority feedback
A couple of months ago, I saw a note on daemonnews that there was a
patch for a proportional share scheduler. When would this work better
than the existing priority feedback scheduler?
NOTE: Please CC me, as I am not currently subscribed. Thanks.
jm
--
My other computer is your windows box.
13 matches
Mail list logo
