On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 12:58:37AM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
> On Thursday 22 February 2007 00:51, Blaisorblade wrote:
> > On Wednesday 21 February 2007 21:19, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
> > > Blaisorblade wrote:
> > > > Using > /dev/null 2>&1 is not suitable?
> > >
> > > Well yes, that might also
On Thursday 22 February 2007 00:51, Blaisorblade wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 February 2007 21:19, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
> > Blaisorblade wrote:
> > > Using > /dev/null 2>&1 is not suitable?
> >
> > Well yes, that might also help.
> > However, when you supply a daemon mode, I think it is also a goo
On Wednesday 21 February 2007 21:19, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
> Blaisorblade wrote:
> > Using > /dev/null 2>&1 is not suitable?
>
> Well yes, that might also help.
> However, when you supply a daemon mode, I think it is also a good idea to
> add a silent feature, so that it is more easily and clea
Blaisorblade wrote:
> Using > /dev/null 2>&1 is not suitable?
Well yes, that might also help.
However, when you supply a daemon mode, I think it is also a good idea to
add a silent feature, so that it is more easily and cleanly scriptable.
> Also happens to me, with a single daemon not connected
On Wednesday 21 February 2007 14:25, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
> Blaisorblade wrote:
> > On Tuesday 20 February 2007 17:37, Jeff Dike wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 04:57:40PM +0100, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
> >>> Is it possible to add an option to uml_switch so that it is completely
> >>> si
Blaisorblade wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 February 2007 17:37, Jeff Dike wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 04:57:40PM +0100, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
>>> Is it possible to add an option to uml_switch so that it is completely
>>> silent?
>> It would be a matter of putting all the printf's under the contr
On Tuesday 20 February 2007 17:37, Jeff Dike wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 04:57:40PM +0100, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
> > Is it possible to add an option to uml_switch so that it is completely
> > silent?
>
> It would be a matter of putting all the printf's under the control of
> such a switch
On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 04:57:40PM +0100, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
> Is it possible to add an option to uml_switch so that it is completely
> silent?
It would be a matter of putting all the printf's under the control of
such a switch - not a big deal.
> I'm using UML as an educational tool to le
Hello,
Is it possible to add an option to uml_switch so that it is completely
silent?
I'm using UML as an educational tool to let students explore computer
networks. However, if we create a network that contains a loop then
uml_switch will start spamming all kinds of messages.
Even if the uml_swi
