On 2005-04-08, at 18:15, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
Linus Torvalds wrote:
SQL Databases like SQLite aren't slow.
But maybe a Berkeley Database v.4 is a better solution.
Yes it sucks less for this purpose. See subversion as reference.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe l
On 2005-04-07, at 09:44, Jan Hudec wrote:
I have looked at most systems currently available. I would suggest
following for closer look on:
1) GNU Arch/Bazaar. They use the same archive format, simple, have the
concepts right. It may need some scripts or add ons. When Bazaar-NG
is ready, it wi
On 2005-04-06, at 23:13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Linus Torvalds wrote:
PS. Don't bother telling me about subversion. If you must, start
reading
up on "monotone". That seems to be the most viable alternative, but
don't
pester the developers so much that they don't get any work done. They
are
alr
On 2005-04-08, at 19:14, Linus Torvalds wrote:
You do that with an sql database, and I'll be impressed.
It's possible. But what will impress you are either the price tag the
DB comes with or
the hardware it runs on :-)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
t
On 2005-04-08, at 20:14, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2005, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
Ok, but if you want to search for information in such big text files
it
slow, because you do linear search
No I don't. I don't search for _anything_. I have my own
content-addressable filesystem, and
On 2005-04-08, at 20:28, Jon Smirl wrote:
On Apr 8, 2005 2:14 PM, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How do you replicate your database incrementally? I've given you
enough
clues to do it for "git" in probably five lines of perl.
Efficient database replication is achieved by copying t
On 2005-04-09, at 03:09, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 03:00:44AM +0200, Marcin Dalecki wrote:
Yes it sucks less for this purpose. See subversion as reference.
Whatever solution people come up with, ideally it should be tolerant
to minor amounts of corruption (so I can recover the
On 2005-04-09, at 17:42, Paul Jackson wrote:
Marcin wrote:
But what will impress you are either the price tag the
DB comes with or
the hardware it runs on :-)
The payroll for the staffing to care and feed for these
babies is often impressive as well.
Please don't forget the bill from the electric p
On 2005-04-11, at 04:26, Miles Bader wrote:
Marcin Dalecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Better don't waste your time with looking at Arch. Stick with patches
you maintain by hand combined with some scripts containing a list of
apply commands and you should be still more productive then
On 2005-04-12, at 04:17, Larry McVoy wrote whatever...
Excuse me, but: who gives a damn shit?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FA
On 2005-02-14, at 16:40, Larry McVoy wrote:
So how would you suggest that we resolve it? The protection we need is
that people don't get to
- use BK
- stop using BK so they can go work on another system
- start using BK again
- stop using BK so they can go work on another system
On 2005-02-14, at 17:00, Larry McVoy wrote:
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 10:03:45AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
Can you see Ford Motors telling
someone that you can't go work for GM if you drive a Ford?
You paid for the Ford. Suppose Ford offered to give you the car but
said if you take it then you ca
On 2005-02-14, at 18:49, Larry McVoy wrote:
r it we'd be happy to negotiate a standard
click-wrap style license as part of the deal. Everyone would like that
much better it seems. Are you volunteering to pay?
I'm not since I'm not using and I don't intend to use BK.
Oh BTW. the main reason for me
On 2005-02-14, at 19:17, Matthew Jacob wrote:
I mean- you're certainly free to impose whatever license you want, and
others are free to be happy or unhappy with that. I'm just trying to
figure out what you're actually trying to accomplish here.
He is simply plain dishonest about his intentions. And
On 2005-02-14, at 19:56, Larry McVoy wrote:
All we are trying to do is
1. Provide the open source community with a useful tool.
2. Prevent that from turning into the open source community
creating a clone of our tool.
Now that's pathetic!
You recognize that point 2. is precisely t
On 2005-03-26, at 16:19, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
`
hda: dma_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error }
hda: dma_intr: error=0x84 { DriveStatusError BadCRC
BadCRC is 99% sure a cabling issue; either a bad/overheated cable or a
cable used at too high a speed for the cable.
No. It is more lik
On 2005-03-27, at 00:21, linux-os wrote:
Always, always, a call will be more expensive than a branch
on condition. It's impossible to be otherwise. A call requires
that the return address be written to memory (the stack),
using register indirection (the stack-pointer).
Needless to say that there ar
On 2005-03-27, at 04:00, Horst von Brand wrote:
Needless to say that there are enough architectures out there, which
don't even have something like an explicit call as separate assembler
instruction...
The mechanism exists somehow.
Most RISC architectures are claiming a huge register set advantage
On 2005-03-29, at 05:36, Lee Revell wrote:
On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 09:42 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
It seems that Apple's driver has an in-kernel framework for doing
volume
control, mixing, and other horrors right in the kernel, in temporary
buffers, just before they get DMA'ed (gack !)
I
On 2005-03-29, at 10:18, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Well, we are claiming _and_ obviously proposing a solution ;)
I beg to differ.
1. Where do you have true "real-time" under linux? Kernel or user
space?
That's bullshit.
Wait a moment...
you don't need "true" real time for the mixing/volume
pro
On 2005-03-29, at 12:22, Takashi Iwai wrote:
ALSA provides the "driver" feature in user-space because it's more
flexible, more efficient and safer than doing in kernel. It's
transparent from apps perspective. It really doesn't matter whether
it's in kernel or user space.
Yes because it's that won
On 2005-03-30, at 00:13, Lee Revell wrote:
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 11:22 +0200, Marcin Dalecki wrote:
No. You didn't get it. I'm taking the view that mixing sound is simply
a task you would typically love to make a DSP firmware do.
However providing a DSP for sound processing at 44kHZ o
On 2005-03-30, at 01:39, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 17:25 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
Lee Revell wrote:
This is the exact line of reasoning that led to Winmodems.
My main issue with winmodems is not so much the software offload, but
rather that the vendors don't release ful
On 2005-01-19, at 04:35, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Matt Mackall wrote:
I would argue that "name of gcc has changed" is possibly a condition
that does more harm than good. It is just as frequently used to have
wrappers, like distcc, as it is to have different versions.
Disagree. I switch compilers all
24 matches
Mail list logo
