ial file as it
is found in /dev. However, it can be any arbitrary string when the asso-
ciated command is not related to a tty.
So you can perfectly run any program there and init will watch or it, just
like in linux.
--
Sincerely,
Alex Semenyaka
_
es not look dangerous, and it will break nothing since
administrator will hav to take special action to turn it on.
--
Sincerely,
Alex Semenyaka
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 10:19:11AM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > Isn't is reasonable to add corresponding optional functionality
> > into the buld process?
> No.
Why? :)
> > For example, if -DSTATIC_TOOLCHAIN (or
> > pick any other name) is set, then:
> > 1) build toolchain statically linked
>
On Sat, Apr 05, 2003 at 01:01:40AM +0200, Socketd wrote:
> When updating to FreeBSD 4.8 I saw that you can give ftpd a -h flag
> when writing "syst" I still get:
> 215 UNIX Type: L8 Version: BSD-199506
You are right, there is no check. Here is the patch to fix it:
Index: ftpcmd.y
===
I found that /bin/sh cannot handle numbers those do not fit to integer type.
That is not too bad. Too bad that it just silently warps them in arithmetical
operations:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> /bin/sh -c 'echo $((100-1))'
2147483646
That was not a problem 5 years ago... But now we have a lot of
Boolean, Buffer,
ClientData),
ClientData));
@@ -1411,7 +1410,7 @@
*
*---
*/
-static char *
+char *
VarQuote(str)
char *str;
{
Sincerely yours,
Alex S
oreover, in the last case there is NO ANY MAKE'S VARIABLE containing VAR, see:
bash-2.05a$ make -DUUU -V .MAKEFLAGS
-D UUU -V .MAKEFLAGS
bash-2.05a$ make UUU=1 -V .MAKEFLAGS
-V .MAKEFLAGS
bash-2.05a$ make UUU=1 -dv -r | grep UUU
bash-2.05a$
Hope now I was more careful and clear... But
Hi there,
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 05:31:01PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
>> make VAR=VAL # .MAKEFLAGS is empty
>> make -DVAR # .MAKEFLAGS is '-D VAR'
> Heh, was looking at this NetBSD commitlog today looking for another
> thing. They apparently have this bug fixed as well, in the step 3
> be
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 11:01:04AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
>> So what will The Right Thing be:
>> - to take ``make'' from NetBSD
>> - to transfer corresponding changes from NetBSD
>> - to re-make my patch (to store the command line variables in MAKEFLAGS,
>>not in the new variable)?
>
9 matches
Mail list logo
