Julian Stacey wrote:
>
> Ollivier Robert wrote:
> > According to Julian Stacey:
> > > 4.1-release produces no /sbin/mount_cfs, & man mount give no hint,
> > > If you have patches to test, I volunteer to test on 4.1 or 3.4 :-)
> > It is a port. I'd love to import it into CURRENT though.
>
> Some
Ollivier Robert wrote:
> According to Julian Stacey:
> > 4.1-release produces no /sbin/mount_cfs, & man mount give no hint,
> > If you have patches to test, I volunteer to test on 4.1 or 3.4 :-)
> It is a port. I'd love to import it into CURRENT though.
Some friends running vile Micro$oft asked m
According to Julian Stacey:
> 4.1-release produces no /sbin/mount_cfs, & man mount give no hint,
> If you have patches to test, I volunteer to test on 4.1 or 3.4 :-)
It is a port. I'd love to import it into CURRENT though.
--
Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ollivier Robert wrote:
> According to Julian Stacey:
> > just as today I'd use an encrypting file system on my new laptop,
> > but such file system don't exist on FreeBSD unfortunately.
>
> Ahem. Why did I sent an update for security/cfs to green a few months ago? :-)
4.1-release produces no /sb
According to Julian Stacey:
> just as today I'd use an encrypting file system on my new laptop,
> but such file system don't exist on FreeBSD unfortunately.
Ahem. Why did I sent an update for security/cfs to green a few months ago? :-)
--
Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- [EMA
"Andrew Reilly" wrote:
> Well, even if there are/were folk who want tiny disk footprints,
> and crunching everything isn't going to do the whole job, wouldn't
> a compressed filesystem be a better way to approach this? At least
> that way you'd still be able to page from the executable(s), and
>
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Julian Stacey wrote:
> That laptop has now gone to 4.0, & aout to elf, & a 1.5G disc, so no
> incentive to do it all again to see how much FreeBSD-4 gzipped aout
> binary tree might save/waste on a whole tree. BTW I was `strip'ing
gzexe(1) is your friend :-)
Kris
--
In Go
On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 02:00:46PM -0600, Nate Williams wrote:
> > No, that's the one case where they help. But people aren't trying to
> > squeeze whole systems into small disks anymore;
>
> Really? News to me...
Well, even if there are/were folk who want tiny disk footprints,
and crunching
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mike Smith writes:
: Typically, the loss of the ability to demand-page from a gzipped
: executable is a worse detracting factor than the space saving makes up
: for.
This is one reason that Timing Solutions runs all of its small systems
out of uncompressed flash o
> > Mike Smith wrote:
> > > gzipped binaries are actually a terrible idea; they actually *waste*
> > > space in most cases.
> >
> > Suprising, They saved space for a 200M disc in a 486 laptop with 3.[2,3,or4],
>
> No, that's the one case where they help. But people aren't trying to
> squeeze
> > From: Mike Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Mike Smith wrote:
> > gzipped binaries are actually a terrible idea; they actually *waste*
> > space in most cases.
>
> Suprising, They saved space for a 200M disc in a 486 laptop with 3.[2,3,or4],
No, that's the one case where they hel
> From: Mike Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mike Smith wrote:
> gzipped binaries are actually a terrible idea; they actually *waste*
> space in most cases.
Suprising, They saved space for a 200M disc in a 486 laptop with 3.[2,3,or4],
it was so tight for space I gzipped everything, (entire o
> > From: John Polstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > No, there isn't. I don't plan to do anything more with the a.out
> > dynamic linker, as I consider it obsolete at this point. I'd
>
> BTW (last I looked) support of gzipped execs was only available for aout, not
> for elf, ... one more residual use
> From: John Polstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> No, there isn't. I don't plan to do anything more with the a.out
> dynamic linker, as I consider it obsolete at this point. I'd
BTW (last I looked) support of gzipped execs was only available for aout, not
for elf, ... one more residual use for aout, (
> Besides, have you even established that dynamically linked programs
> load too slowly? I've certainly never heard any complaints along
> those lines. Furthermore I would bet that the bulk of the dynamic
> linking time comes from opening the shared libraries and mmapping
> them, and there's not
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alex Zepeda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, John Polstra wrote:
>
> > FreeBSD ELF: It's required by the ELF specification.
> >
> > FreeBSD a.out: Backward compatibility.
> >
> > Linux ELF: Because it's part of Linux and that's just
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, John Polstra wrote:
> Glad you liked the idea! :-)
Well imagine if Joe user gets a Linux binary or a.out binary to run.
Bam, it doesn't run, and one'd have to check each file, and unset the
variables. Or forgo any user-feedback. :(
> Well, there is a different reason fo
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alex Zepeda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Uck.
Glad you liked the idea! :-)
> I'm curious, why do a.out/FreeBSD-elf/Linux-elf programs all respond to
> the same variables? Sure it's perhaps a consistant interface, but
> wouldn't somthing like LINUX_LD_LIBRARY_
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, John Polstra wrote:
> No, there isn't. I don't plan to do anything more with the a.out
> dynamic linker, as I consider it obsolete at this point. I'd
> suggest making a script "run_aout" that looks something like this
> (untested):
Uck.
> BTW, it's generally not a good id
On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 03:25:07AM -0700, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> you're like me and still somewhat attached to the idea of using Navigator
> which is an a.out binary (perhaps the only one I still have left), you're
Use the BSDI Netscape ports, which are ELF and don't require any
emulation. They ar
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alex Zepeda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[LD_PRELOAD and LD_LIBRARY_PATH]
> This works great if you're using your average ELF binary. However, if
> you're like me and still somewhat attached to the idea of using Navigator
> which is an a.out binary (perhaps the onl
So I find myself playing more and more with KDE, and more and more
enjoying the nifty little hacks it does. But, most of the hacks depend on
shlibs, including the requisite libtool horrors. Anyhow, one of the more
"useful" features involves "pre-loading" a shared lib to replace a few X
functions
22 matches
Mail list logo
