[ Charset ISO-Latin1 unsupported, converting… ]
Is it true you still use mutt to read your e-mail? :-)
- Jordan
___
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src
> On Aug 4, 2016, at 10:06 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> personally I'd rather we drove a stake through the heart of symbol versioning
> and
> went back to how it was, when one could work out what was going on.
> I certainly miss the ability to get the openssl package to overwrite the base
>
Or hellsbells. :-)
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 12, 2016, at 08:49, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
>
>
> Maybe his name should be changed to melbel, which would eliminate
> the me/me@ kerfuffle.
___
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.
> On Apr 1, 2015, at 11:04 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
>
> On 1 Apr 2015, at 18:41, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
>>
>> I guess you were right, this was bad.
>>
>> I moved the implementation to null.c, I hope this makes everyone happy.
>>
>> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-all/2015-April/10
On Jul 15, 2014, at 7:40 PM, dte...@freebsd.org wrote:
> I define non-UNIXy as chicanery that makes working in a
> POSIX environment more difficult
POSIX does not define or mandate any specific set of environment variables. OS
X is POSIX and UNIX03 compliant (and qualified to use the Unix trad
On Jul 15, 2014, at 7:13 PM, dte...@freebsd.org wrote:
> I would argue that not all programs are going to like having
> a nearly empty environment. Things like TERM and SHLVL
> at the very least should be passed (after-all, the boot process
> takes place on [a] a terminal and [b] in a shell).
Hav
On Jul 10, 2014, at 10:20 AM, David Chisnall
wrote:
> This is important in a wider context. For example, in the project to add
> machine-readable output to core utilities, we'd like to be able to parse
> these into the same machine-readable format. Apple has the CoreFoundation
> library fo
On Apr 6, 2014, at 2:34 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> So if we want to be taken seriously by those funny companies that make CPUs,
> then:
Not really religious about that at all, I just wonder the following:
1. How long will it be considered worthwhile to not be able to have various
advanced fea
On Apr 4, 2014, at 7:03 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
> That said, I think we're increasingly going to be using LLVM for things that
> are beyond just simple AOT compilation, so platforms with no LLVM back end
> are likely to be left behind.
Amen, and a topic worth an entire discussion in its own
On Apr 4, 2014, at 5:55 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
> We'd like to kill off gcc 4.2.1 in base, because it doesn't support C11 or
> C++11. The lack of C++11 support is a problem because it means gcc
> architectures can't build libc++, so they need to use an old libstdc++ to
> build C++ things in
On Apr 4, 2014, at 5:33 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
> The slight problem, however, is that we would still like to be able to build
> the base system with a more or less standard C compiler. Blocks are in clang
> and are slowly making their way into commercial compilers, but the only two
> vers
On Apr 4, 2014, at 5:31 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote:
> Respectfully, as a developer, why would I want to use libdispatch and
> not libevent? Libevent looks far more portable.
Equally respectfully, if you’re comparing libevent and libdispatch at all, then
you’re only getting about 10% of what libdi
On Apr 4, 2014, at 4:59 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
> I believe that libdispatch most likely won't be imported until there is an
> in-tree consumer, but it's in ports and there's nothing stopping ports
> depending on it if they want to use it...
I certainly get and even generally agree with that
On Jan 5, 2014, at 5:18 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> *Anyone working on a GCD-enabled version of grep or sort? :).
Look at stdlib/FreeBSD/psort.c in OS X’s Libc
(http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/os-x-109/Libc-997.1.1) - that’s the
basis for the GCD-aware sort.
I don’t know if we got aro
14 matches
Mail list logo
