Thanks for the fast reply.
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 05:45:15PM -0500, David E. Cross wrote:
> As for "client" vs. "server", that is quite tricky since WRT NFS locking
> they are both client and server. The "server" side is done and requires no
> modifcations to the kernel. However a FreeBSD
Im confused as to what difference it makes? No production server should
ever use bpf for any "performance" oriented function anyway.
Plus if you are doing network testing you should write to dev/null or a ram
disk or better yet dump the packets rather than store them, Every disk will
be diff
David,
I wrote the NFS lockd code for BSD/OS (it's based on some user land
stuff Keith Bostic did, and then Kirk McKusick helped clean up my
basic design and the VFS layering for the server/kernel side).
It has passed the connectathon tests, and has been being
used by BSD/OS customers for a whi
Which list would be more appropriate for asking advice on designing a
mail processing strategy for FreshPorts 2 (i.e. processing all of cvs-all,
not just the ports)?
I'm looking for recommendations and guidance on how to capture the
incoming messages and process them one at a time. As opposed
Hi!
following section 22 of the handbook I added some config options I
just invented to guard some ad-hoc code I inserted in some kernel files
for RELEASE-4.1.1. All the options go to opt_navi.h. The config program
accepts this options and produces the apropriate opt_navi.h file in the
compile dir
"Koster, K.J." wrote:
>
> >
> > > A simple way to keep the kernel simple:
> > >
> > http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2000-12-09-013-20-NW-GN-KN
> >
> > Device drivers in Perl. What a spectacularly bad idea. ;^)
> >
> That's what people used to say about writing kernels in C.
But thos
Marc sent me this:
> > > > pushl %ebp
> > > > movl %esp,%ebp
> > > > subl $8,%esp
> > > >
> > > This might not be of interest to the rest of the mailing list
> > > but what is the purpose of the subl instruction used before
> > > calling functions? Is that where the return
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> * Martin Blapp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001215 01:39] wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to import the NetBSD RPC-Interface, based on Sun's TI-RPC code.
> >
> > This will made available the TI-RPC features and generated code with
> > rpcgen will compile then without prob
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 08:00:18AM -0800, Dan "Mahir" Phoenix wrote:
> what you mean device side?
> you mean server side?
He meant exactly what he said:
[billf.yahoo-root 16:26:00]
< /dev # ifconfig tun0
ifconfig: interface tun0 does not exist
[billf.yahoo-root 16:26:09]
< /dev # dd if=/dev/tun0
In the last episode (Dec 16), Axel Thimm said:
> Wouldn't that mean, that you might cause data corruption if, say, I
> was to read my mail from a FreeBSD box over an NFS mounted spool
> directory (running under OSF1 in our case), and I decided to write
> back the mbox to the spool dir the same mom
On 12 Dec, Fulvio Risso wrote:
> I do not agree with you.
> Partially supported by Ms Research means that we got:
> - software
> - 1 Dell workstation
>
> That's it.
> I *strongly* suggest to ask someone before opening your mouth.
>
Your tone strongly suggest your research is less than
objective
On Saturday 16 December 2000 16:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 12 Dec, Fulvio Risso wrote:
> > I do not agree with you.
> > Partially supported by Ms Research means that we got:
> > - software
> > - 1 Dell workstation
> >
> > That's it.
> > I *strongly* suggest to ask someone before opening you
Patryk Zadarnowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Now that I think of it, there aren't many commercial microkernel
>systems out there with the possible exception of QNX and lots of
>little embedded toys.
Mac OS X is based on Mach.
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
"A
On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Tony Finch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Patryk Zadarnowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Now that I think of it, there aren't many commercial microkernel
>> systems out there with the possible exception of QNX and lots of
>> little embedded toys.
> Mac OS X is based on M
> PS. Before this starts a flame war, let me say that I really believe
> that MacOS X is a very good thing for everyone involved, although the
> choice of Mach for the microkernel seems a little arbitrary if not
> misguided.
It's hardly arbitrary, though the jury's still out as to whether it's
mi
I've made the following change to newfs man page locally. Please
comment upon the style of the change as well as its technical
accuracy. Style comments should be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
[EMAIL PROTECTED] cc'd (I'm not on doc@). Technical content comments
should be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTE
On Sat, Dec 16, 2000 at 04:26:58PM -0600, Dan Nelson wrote:
> That's why dotlocking is recommended for locking mail spools. Both
> procmail and mutt will dotlock your mail file while it's being
> accessed.
Or Maildirs.
--
Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/"Modularity is not a hack."
On Sat, Dec 16, 2000 at 06:37:56PM -0800, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
> It's hardly arbitrary, though the jury's still out as to whether it's
> misguided or not. You may remember that Apple bought a little company
> called NeXT a few years back. Well, that company's people had a lot
> to do with the O
18 matches
Mail list logo
