On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 02:29:09PM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 03:12:45PM +0400, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> > > What I dislike about the patch is the new kernel-private flag that is
> > > eaten from the open(2) flags namespace. We do already have FHASLOCK,
> > > so far the o
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 11:28:48AM +0400, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 02:29:09PM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 03:12:45PM +0400, Igor Sysoev wrote:
>
> > > > What I dislike about the patch is the new kernel-private flag that is
> > > > eaten from the
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 11:53:46AM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 11:28:48AM +0400, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 02:29:09PM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 03:12:45PM +0400, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> >
> > > > > What I dislike
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 02:29:09PM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > > What I dislike about the patch is the new kernel-private flag that is
> > > eaten from the open(2) flags namespace. We do already have FHASLOCK,
> > > so far the only such flag.
> >
> > We can change
> > intf_seqcount;
>
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:40:27AM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 03:26:41PM -0700, Xin LI wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hi, Igor,
> >
> > Igor Sysoev wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > nginx-0.8.15 can use completely non-blocking sendfi
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 01:49:36PM +0200, Giulio Ferro wrote:
[...]
> Now I try to do the same on a zfs partition on the same machine
> This is what I see with ls
> ---
> ls -la
> total 4
> drwxrwx--- 3 www www 4 Sep 12 13:43 .
>
On Sunday 20 September 2009 10:43:01 am sojdaa wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> Like in the subject, I want to install SVN FreeBSD repo mirror and would
> like to have the possibility to create my own branches, that will be merged
> with synchronized local mirror. I've done this using svk after reading the
>
On Monday 21 September 2009 8:03:43 am Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Hi,
> Reference:
> > From: Alexey Shuvaev
> > Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 14:56:59 +0200
> > Message-id: <20090918125659.ga88...@wep4035.physik.uni-wuerzburg.de>
>
> Alexey Shuvaev wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 18
On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, John Baldwin wrote:
My comment is to just use 4.x (seriously). A true 386 is going to be quite
slow and the overhead of many things added that work well on newer processors
is going to be very painful on a 386 (probably on a 486 as well). 4.x runs
fine on a 386 and should
9 matches
Mail list logo