This patch conditionalizes a pair of FreeBSD compiler extensions so
that its CFLAGS are only used on FreeBSD.
--
Robert Millan
Index: sys/conf/kern.mk
===
--- sys/conf/kern.mk(revision 223736)
+++ sys/conf/kern.mk(working cop
On Sun, 3 Jul 2011, exorcistkiller wrote:
Hi! I am taking a FreeBSD course this summer and I'm doing a homework. A new
system call uidkill() is to be added. uidkill(uid_t uid, int signum) sends
signal specified by signum to all processes owned by uid, excluding the
calling process itself.
I
Why do you need this? Format-extensions are kernel only (which you dont use I
presume) and no-align-long-strings is boot only (which you dont use either).
Hm? :)
roman
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 10:27:51AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> This patch conditionalizes a pair of FreeBSD compiler extension
On 07/ 5/11 03:27 PM, Robert Millan wrote:
This patch conditionalizes a pair of FreeBSD compiler extensions so
that its CFLAGS are only used on FreeBSD.
Were I work we don't spend much time on compiling any kernel, but I'm
superficially curious about the actual code which necessitates you
need
On 2011-07-04 18:30, Robert Millan wrote:
This patch fixes a (harmless) warning when is parsed by
upstream version of GCC.
-#if __FreeBSD_cc_version >= 31 && defined(__GNUC__) &&
!defined(__INTEL_COMPILER)
+#if defined(__FreeBSD_cc_version) && __FreeBSD_cc_version >= 31 &&
defined(__G
Am 05.07.2011 12:11, schrieb Dimitry Andric:
> On 2011-07-04 18:30, Robert Millan wrote:
>> This patch fixes a (harmless) warning when is parsed by
>> upstream version of GCC.
>>
>> -#if __FreeBSD_cc_version >= 31 && defined(__GNUC__) &&
>> !defined(__INTEL_COMPILER)
>> +#if defined(__FreeBSD_
On 06/24/2011 03:14 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday, June 24, 2011 3:23:11 am Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> exists there some unit tests for FreeBSD kernel APIs, e.g. mutex(9),
>> condvar(9), etc.?
>>
>> Have a nice day!
>
> Hmm, I have a kernel module that does some tests, but it is
2011/7/5 Dimitry Andric :
> As far as I can see, this code only gives warnings when compiled with
> gcc 4.5 or higher, and when using the -Wundef flag. Isn't it easier to
> just remove the -Wundef flag here?
Here's a patch to remove -Wundef. I think it's a bad idea however,
IMHO it's better to f
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 6:36 AM, Robert Millan wrote:
> 2011/7/5 Dimitry Andric :
>> As far as I can see, this code only gives warnings when compiled with
>> gcc 4.5 or higher, and when using the -Wundef flag. Isn't it easier to
>> just remove the -Wundef flag here?
>
> Here's a patch to remove -W
2011/7/5 Roman Divacky :
> Why do you need this? Format-extensions are kernel only (which you dont use I
> presume)
Actually, we compile the kernel of FreeBSD regularly, both 8-STABLE
and 9-CURRENT. It is the base of the Debian GNU/kFreeBSD
distribution. We've recently ported the build system so
On Sun, 3 Jul 2011 17:47:02 +0200
Robert Millan wrote:
> 2011/7/3 Robert Millan :
> > 2011/7/3 Alexander Kabaev :
> >> Not really, unless you have way of sticking this definition into
> >> past compiler releases.
> >
> > There is one way, but it's slow. It basically involves waiting for
> > long
On Sun, 3 Jul 2011 17:37:30 +0200
Robert Millan wrote:
> 2011/7/3 Alexander Kabaev :
> > __linux__ is exactly what __FreeBSD__ is and dies not identify
> > kernel but rather Linux as whole OS, whatever that might be these
> > days.
> >
> > There does not appear to be an universal macro that ident
There's a regression error with calendar between FreeBSD-8.1 & 8.2-RELEASES
Test data:
-
Tue+1 TESTX 1
Tuesday+1 TESTX 2
* Tuesday+1 TESTX 3
Tuesday+1 * TESTX 4
Tuesday TESTX5
Tuesday TESTX6
-
Data shown with od -c in case any mail or web arch
2011/7/5 Alexander Kabaev :
> I agree with all of the above reasons, but none of them change the fact
> that __linux__ is used left and right to identify both kernel and
> userland environments
Yes, __linux__ is used to identify userland. And almost 100% of the
times it is the wrong macro. We've
On 2011-07-05, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> There's a regression error with calendar between FreeBSD-8.1 & 8.2-RELEASES
> Test data:
> -
> Tue+1 TESTX 1
> Tuesday+1 TESTX 2
> * Tuesday+1 TESTX 3
> Tuesday+1 * TESTX 4
> Tuesday TESTX5
> Tuesday TESTXX
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 21:04:41 +0200
Robert Millan wrote:
> 2011/7/5 Alexander Kabaev :
> > I agree with all of the above reasons, but none of them change the
> > fact that __linux__ is used left and right to identify both kernel
> > and userland environments
>
> Yes, __linux__ is used to identify
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:05:27PM -0400, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> I agree with all of the above reasons, but none of them change the fact
> that __linux__ is used left and right to identify both kernel and
> userland environments just as __FreeBSD__ is. You choose to disable
> __FreeBSD__ in GNU
Hi Jaako,
> From: Jaakko Heinonen
Jaakko Heinonen wrote:
> On 2011-07-05, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> > There's a regression error with calendar between FreeBSD-8.1 & 8.2-RELEASES
> > Test data:
> > -
> > Tue+1 TESTX 1
> > Tuesday+1 TESTX 2
> > * Tuesday+1 TESTX 3
>
hi there,
i'm seeing the following with 'vmstat -z' on CURRENT, running on amd64:
ITEM SIZE LIMIT USED FREE REQ FAIL SLEEP
128 Bucket:1048, 0, 150, 0,1650,12746, 0
...how can the number of failures be greater than the number of req
On 6 July 2011 02:46, Alexander Best wrote:
> hi there,
>
> i'm seeing the following with 'vmstat -z' on CURRENT, running on amd64:
>
> ITEM SIZE LIMIT USED FREE REQ FAIL SLEEP
> 128 Bucket: 1048, 0, 150, 0, 1650,12746, 0
>
> ...how ca
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 10:46:09PM +, Alexander Best wrote:
> hi there,
>
> i'm seeing the following with 'vmstat -z' on CURRENT, running on amd64:
>
> ITEM SIZE LIMIT USED FREE REQ FAIL SLEEP
> 128 Bucket:1048, 0, 150, 0,1650,1
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 04:40:54AM +0400, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
> On 6 July 2011 02:46, Alexander Best wrote:
> > hi there,
> >
> > i'm seeing the following with 'vmstat -z' on CURRENT, running on amd64:
> >
> > ITEM SIZE LIMIT USED FREE REQ FAIL SLEEP
> > 128 B
2011/7/5 Ed Maste :
> On the topic of where such a macro should be defined I originally had
> no strong opinion. However, valid points have been raised about
> compiling software for FreeBSD using compilers that are not the one in
> the base system (from ports or otherwise, and GCC or otherwise).
23 matches
Mail list logo