Linux-Development-Sys Digest #540, Volume #6 Sat, 27 Mar 99 22:14:14 EST
Contents:
Re: G200 Suport.. (Jan Wielemaker)
Re: NT has IOCompletionPort() (Andi Kleen)
Debugging pthread based apps with gdb (pmueller)
Re: Free IDE for developing under Linux ("Jan M. Hochstein")
Re: Debugging question. (Michael Hirsch)
Re: what "rc" scripts exist for linux? (david parsons)
Re: Security issues (Martin Maney)
Re: Devloping Linux apps on NT? (Peter Pointner)
Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0 (Johan Kullstam)
Talkd (Roy Galloway)
bootsect.S - What assembler to use to assemble ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Free IDE for developing under Linux (David M. Cook)
Re: Devloping Linux apps on NT? (Erik Olson)
Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC. ("FM")
Kernel build problem (John Bullock)
Re: Kernel build problem (Ajit Krishnan)
Re: Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC. (Alexander Viro)
Re: Security issues (Michael Schuerig)
Re: Free IDE for developing under Linux (Magnus Ahltorp)
Re: Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC. (David M. Cook)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jan Wielemaker)
Subject: Re: G200 Suport..
Date: 27 Mar 1999 16:17:28 GMT
In article <7dh79j$tku$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Riacardo wrote:
> I am hanving trouble fiding suport or drivers for my new Matrox G200 AGP
>on Red Hat 5.2.
Runs like a charm using SuSE 6.0 on the svga server, but support was
announced as new for 6.0. Guess you need the very latest svga server.
Regards --- Jan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jan Wielemaker Author of SWI-Prolog and the XPCE GUI library
SWI, University of Amsterdam http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/projects/SWI-Prolog/
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/projects/xpce/
------------------------------
From: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT has IOCompletionPort()
Date: 27 Mar 1999 18:25:06 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Peltz) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"jacob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >Linux 2.2 supports queued POSIX realtime signals that carry a long
> >of information. You can send them between threads. You need glibc 2.1
> >for the necessary include files.
>
> It isn't a good idea to depend on being able to send signals between threads.
>
> For threads, use either a mutex or a condition variable.
Then tell that the POSIX comittee which put pthread_kill/pthread_sigmask et.al.
into 1003.1c.
Admittetly LinuxThreads has a non standard signal handling, but it is usually
possible to work around these differences without too many problems. Every
conforming pthreads implementation has to implement pthread_kill !
-Andi
--
This is like TV. I don't like TV.
------------------------------
From: pmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Debugging pthread based apps with gdb
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 19:59:46 +0100
Hi,
i have some problems debugging a multithreaded (pthreads) application
(sigusr1, no breakpoints possible in a thread). Can anyone point me to a
doc that describes how to do this? I found some hints that a patched gdb
is necessary. But i was not able to built it. Is there a pre compiled
binary for i386/glib2 based linux systems available?
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Jan M. Hochstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Free IDE for developing under Linux
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 20:24:26 +0100
Christoph Lindner wrote:
> I´m just a beginner in programming under linux now.
>
> But I want to start coding under Linux in C or C++
> and I´m looking for a free compfortable IDE to do so.
>
> I´ve programmed some very small app. yet by
> using xemax, saving the .cc file and starting the gcc
> from command line.
> What I need is a easy to use tool to generate the makefile
> for larger projects by itself, to generate ressources and so on.
>
> How do you guys manage large projects ?
>
> At the moment I use the Code Warrior under NT.
Take a look at http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/baron/development.html.
I never use resources (dialogs, menues etc) in C/C++. Java is easier for
X-programming.
------------------------------
From: Michael Hirsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Debugging question.
Date: 25 Mar 1999 22:50:44 -0500
Modemch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Christopher Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > A quick-and-dirty method is to just run your program in gdb and let it
> > segfault. Then do
> > a 'where' to dump your stack. This may help to find the function/line number
> > of the problem
>
> Well, yeah, but unfortunately that only works if you do something stupid,
> like write to a NULL pointer. I get a segfault when trying to access
> already corrupted pointers, and backtracing doesn't really help. Back in
Have you tried linking with electricfence? That will catch a lot of
memory and pointer errors the moment they occur. It's saved my butt
on occasion.
BTW, does anyone know how to get electricfence to work with threadded
programs?
--
Michael D. Hirsch Work: (404) 727-7940
Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322 FAX: (404) 727-5611
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mathcs.emory.edu/~hirsch/
Public key for encrypted mail available upon request (or finger
[EMAIL PROTECTED]).
------------------------------
From: o r c @ p e l l . p o r t l a n d . o r . u s (david parsons)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: what "rc" scripts exist for linux?
Date: 25 Mar 1999 20:50:01 -0800
In article <7d96js$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <7d8jfp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>david parsons <o r c @ p e l l . p o r t l a n d . o r . u s> wrote:
>> The complexity in each makefile begins to get somewhat daunting, I'm
>> afraid.
>
>Umm, no. All complexity goes into the standard black magic at the end of
>*main* makefile. Other just declare their existance and dependencies (see
>above) and give all specific actions. Stuff in the end of the main makefile
>goes through the combined lists and adds all dependencies between the goals.
>In the example above you'ld get
>network_stop: nfs_stop
>nfs_start: network_start
Well, if you're going to use touch for setting up the shutdown
registry, you don't need the _stop entries (and, anyways, you
can't have the root services assume that other services have
been called; if you add new services that depend on network,
you've broken modularity to have to go into network and have
it shut those services down.)
So I'd drop the start stanzas, and replace them with:
makefile <foo>:
<foo>:
// start the service here
<foo>_stop:
// stop the service here.
So clients of <foo> would just have
<bar>: <foo>
<bar>_stop:
You'd still need to do some magic for backing down the service tree,
but at least the amount of magic has been reduced substantially.
____
david parsons \bi/ Makefiles. Why did it have to be Makefiles?
\/
------------------------------
From: Martin Maney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Security issues
Date: 27 Mar 1999 20:19:40 GMT
Michael Schuerig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Most of the stuff on security I've seen is concerned with administrative
> issues, that I'm not particularly intersted in. Rather, I'd like to get
> an idea of the programming side of things: What do I have to do to
> ensure my programs aren't easily exploitable? Any pointers, where I can
> get started?
Although it is more overtly concerned with safety and reliability issues,
there's a huge overlap with security, so you may find Les Hatton's _Safer C_
full of useful advice.
------------------------------
From: Peter Pointner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Devloping Linux apps on NT?
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 06:09:30 GMT
Bob Tennent <r d t@c s.q u e e n s u.c a> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Mar 1999 17:21:43 -0600, Bill Zimmerly wrote:
> >> Without sounding like treason can anyone provide any useful advice on how
> >i
> >> can go about developing linux apps on a NT workstation?
> >
> >Sure, a few tips...
> >
> >[Sarcastic Mode On]
> >
> >Put a linux box right next to it on the hub and use NT's "Telnet" program!
> >
> >[Sarcastic Mode Off]
> >
> I hope the telnet program on NT is better than the junk they supply on
> Windows 95. They can't even get telnet right.
Don't know about NT. The best package I found for Win 9x is something
called teraterm (or terraterm?). And Win 98 hyperterminal has a telnet
mode which seems to be slightly better than telnet.
Peter
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,linux.redhat.misc,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 27 Mar 1999 17:41:01 -0500
d s f o x @ c o g s c i . u c s d . e d u (David Fox) writes:
> "Idea Man" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Does anyone else think this would be a good idea? Keep the i386 tree, and
> > add an i686 tree that is optimized for P-II/Celeron/P-III processors.
> >
> > This might be a pain in the butt for the mirrors (more hard drive space
> > used), but for some mirrors this would be just fine. This would also make
> > Linux higher performing for all the people with flashy new Pentium-III
> > machines...
>
> How much performance improvement would there be?
based on my experience with egcs over the past year, not much.
the pentium classic seems to be hypersensitive to scheduling, but the
i686 (i have a pentiumpro) seems have roughly the same performance
(using time on a few of my programs) for compiles with -march=i386,
i486 or pentiumpro. -march=pentium hurt speed by about 10%.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: Roy Galloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Talkd
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 19:24:42 -0400
My programmer keeps getting kicked out of talk when idle for a few
minutes. Is there a way to shut off the timer or disable the timeout for
talk? Thank you
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: bootsect.S - What assembler to use to assemble
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 23:40:14 GMT
AS86 does not understand the format of linux/arch/i386/boot/bootsect.S
What assembler is used to assemble it? I've tired all of the ones I
know.
Neil
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Cook)
Subject: Re: Free IDE for developing under Linux
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 00:18:10 GMT
On Sat, 27 Mar 1999 12:17:47 +0100, Christoph Lindner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>using xemax, saving the .cc file and starting the gcc
>from command line.
I have some tips on using xemacs as a development environment at
http://members.home.com/davecook/emacs/
>What I need is a easy to use tool to generate the makefile
>for larger projects by itself, to generate ressources and so on.
See http://members.home.com/davecook/devel/#make for a partial listing of
make tools.
>How do you guys manage large projects ?
Most *large* OSS projects (and even many small ones) use autoconf.
>At the moment I use the Code Warrior under NT.
Code Warrior is supposed to be available for Linux this spring.
Dave Cook
--
No Linux for you!
------------------------------
From: Erik Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Devloping Linux apps on NT?
Date: 28 Mar 1999 00:46:47 GMT
steve mcadams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't see it as a matter of alleigiance. What are you using on NT?
> I use DevStudio. If you want to continue to use it (or whatever your
> current toolset is) while starting development on Linux, there are two
> ways you can go.
> One way is how I'm set up now. I'm running NT Server 4.0 and Linux
> SuSE 5.3 on my development system. When Linux is running I have my NT
> drives mounted as their drive letters. For example the drive that NT
...
> The other way only applies if you have two systems; under Linux you
> need to set up samba to mount the NT drive, again as vfat. Under NT
...
Check out http://www.vmware.com
They make a commercial "Virtual Platform" OS switcher. It was slick.
Toggle back and forth between OS's like lightning with just a key stroke.
I saw them at Linux World Expo last month and it seemed like a cool
program, it was useless for me, but it might do exactly what you are
looking for.
erik olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "FM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.help,comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC.
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 16:53:01 -0800
What do most Linux programmers use as programming tools? I'm
currently using Win98 despite its extreme instability and other
fallacies because I do not at the moment have my own computer.
I'll soon get my own computer, hopefully this summer or fall,
and do not wish to tolerate any more MS nonsense on it,
although I might reserve a small partition for compatibility
reasons. While I've used Linux before, my experience has been
somewhat limited and my programming experience has been entirely
confined to the Win/Dos environment. This also means that I'm
quite accustomed to Borland Win/Dos interface, including RHIDE,
a front-end to DJGPP, a DOS port of GCC. I would just like to
know what tools the actual linux/unix programmers use and how
they compare to typical Windows/Dos IDE's. Are there GUI/Menu-
driven programming environments available? If so, are they widely
used? Why/why not? In general, I'd like a comparison of various
Unix programming tools/environments/sets of tools. Thanks in
advance.
------------------------------
From: John Bullock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Kernel build problem
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 02:05:50 +0000
I am trying to rebuild my 2.0.36 kernel, I go through the config and
make. Towards the end of the build (when it is making zImage) I get the
following:
.............
tools/build bootsect setup compressed/vmlinux.out CURRENT > zImage
Root device is (3, 1)
Boot sector 512 bytes.
Setup is 4396 bytes.
System is 521 kB
System is too big
make[1]: *** [zImage] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.0.36/arch/i386/boot'
make: *** [zImage] Error 2
Has anyone seen this, and if so what resolution.
Thanks
John Bullock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ajit Krishnan)
Subject: Re: Kernel build problem
Date: 28 Mar 1999 02:14:56 GMT
your kernel is too big...use 'make bzImage' instead of 'make zImage'
for better compression...everything else should be the same
ajit
John Bullock ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I am trying to rebuild my 2.0.36 kernel, I go through the config and
: make. Towards the end of the build (when it is making zImage) I get the
: following:
: .............
: tools/build bootsect setup compressed/vmlinux.out CURRENT > zImage
: Root device is (3, 1)
: Boot sector 512 bytes.
: Setup is 4396 bytes.
: System is 521 kB
: System is too big
: make[1]: *** [zImage] Error 1
: make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.0.36/arch/i386/boot'
: make: *** [zImage] Error 2
: Has anyone seen this, and if so what resolution.
: Thanks
: John Bullock
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC.
Date: 27 Mar 1999 21:15:33 -0500
In article <7djucs$gkf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
FM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[One general comment: such things are better done if you are setting
Followup-To: poster or at most to *one* group and after enough replies
post a summary. No offence - it's just considered a good tone. I'm
setting followups to on-topic groups]
>What do most Linux programmers use as programming tools? I'm
>currently using Win98 despite its extreme instability and other
>fallacies because I do not at the moment have my own computer.
>I'll soon get my own computer, hopefully this summer or fall,
>and do not wish to tolerate any more MS nonsense on it,
>although I might reserve a small partition for compatibility
>reasons. While I've used Linux before, my experience has been
>somewhat limited and my programming experience has been entirely
>confined to the Win/Dos environment. This also means that I'm
>quite accustomed to Borland Win/Dos interface, including RHIDE,
>a front-end to DJGPP, a DOS port of GCC. I would just like to
>know what tools the actual linux/unix programmers use and how
>they compare to typical Windows/Dos IDE's. Are there GUI/Menu-
>driven programming environments available? If so, are they widely
>used? Why/why not? In general, I'd like a comparison of various
>Unix programming tools/environments/sets of tools. Thanks in
>advance.
<disclaimer>
It's a holy wars material, so YMMV is implied. You'll definitely
hear a lot of other, erm, opinions.
</disclaimer>
<asbestos underware>
1) AFAIK RHIDE is available at least for Linux. AFAIK == I've seen
it mentioned in postings, but never used it myself.
2) For me the main unpleasant thing about RHIDE is that it (AFAIK)
contains only Borland-like (i.e. very inefficient) editor.
3) I'm using nvi + make + gdb. nvi has the whole editing power of vi
and can be used as environment (e.g. gdb in a separate window). For kernel
work - same, minus gdb. Some folks prefer EMACS, but they are misguided
heretics (should I mention that they have opposite opinion?) Seriously, EMACS
is too inefficient and bloated for my taste.
4) Learning make is *must*. It's the standard tool. No 'projects' will
replace it. Take a week to learn the thing - it will save you a lot of time
later. There are good descriptions - as always, see O'Railey books.
5) More-or-less standard debugger being gdb. Ditto.
6) Other useful tools (for cases when you want to see WTF it sends/
receives/waits for/creates/lseeks to/etc.; i.e. interaction with the kernel)
use strace/truss/ktrace (depending on flavor you may have several of them
available). All of them are trivial to learn. Look what they can do and
use when needed. Main thing being to know about their existance. Additional
useful things - fuser and lsof. Ditto.
7) Learn *powerful* editor. No, Borland-alikes do not qualify. Sorry.
Unfamiliar editor may be very painful at first, but after a week you'll know
enough of it to feel yourself OK. For vi I'ld recommend to find vilearn and
go through it. For EMACS - ask EMACS addict^Wusers. joe is similar to Borland
ones, but it's a *big* drawback. Sure, you can transform any text to any other
by any editor, but too many tasks are too time- and keystrokes-consuming with
Borland-alikes (and to lesser extent with joe).
8) learn cxref and ctags. There are situations when you really need
to find where the hell remove_foo_from_bar2() is defined and where else it is
called. Grepping your way around the whole source may be, erm, unpleasant.
9) Consider learning some revision-control tools. You will need them
once the program will grow enough. It's also a topic of holy wars, indeed
(read: there are several alternative systems available). Personally I use RCS
and CVS.
</asbestos underware>
--
Think of the linux kernel community as a large cluster of hairy SMP systems.
Changing anything in the way people write code requires flushing a huge number
of L2 caches inside people's heads -- Michael Elizabeth Chastain on l-k
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Schuerig)
Subject: Re: Security issues
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 03:33:01 +0200
Martin Maney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Schuerig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Most of the stuff on security I've seen is concerned with administrative
> > issues, that I'm not particularly intersted in. Rather, I'd like to get
> > an idea of the programming side of things: What do I have to do to
> > ensure my programs aren't easily exploitable? Any pointers, where I can
> > get started?
>
> Although it is more overtly concerned with safety and reliability issues,
> there's a huge overlap with security, so you may find Les Hatton's _Safer C_
> full of useful advice.
I had a look at the ToC on the web. From what I glean it's not what I'm
looking for, but my question has been too unspecific. I'm interested in
the Unix/Linux environment in particular. I'm looking for advice similar
to "If you really need to give root privileges to a program, then do it
like this...".
Michael
--
Michael Schuerig
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.schuerig.de/michael/
------------------------------
From: Magnus Ahltorp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Free IDE for developing under Linux
Date: 28 Mar 1999 04:29:21 +0200
> I´ve programmed some very small app. yet by
> using xemax, saving the .cc file and starting the gcc
> from command line.
> What I need is a easy to use tool to generate the makefile
> for larger projects by itself, to generate ressources and so on.
GNU automake and GNU autoconf are two packages that ease the
generation of makefiles.
> How do you guys manage large projects ?
That depends on what you mean. I get along pretty well by keeping
related stuff in different subdirectories and using etags (a package
for locating functions, variable definitions, etc) and mkid (a package
for locating usage of functions and variables). Etags is included in
emacs.
I'd recommend RCS or CVS for version control. RCS is easy for small
projects, but CVS is almost necessary if you are many people working on
a large project.
Emacs has support for these systems.
/Magnus
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Cook)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.help,comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: Programming tools for Linux/Unix: Editor, IDE, Frontend to GCC.
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 03:12:48 GMT
On Sat, 27 Mar 1999 16:53:01 -0800, FM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What do most Linux programmers use as programming tools?
I've never seen any kind of survey about what editors productive Linux
programmers use. vim is popular, as is emacs, but you should not feel
obligated to use what other people use. For C programming most everyone
will use the same tools: gcc, make, rcs, gdb.
>quite accustomed to Borland Win/Dos interface, including RHIDE,
You can use RHIDE under Linux, but AFAIK, it only works in the console. You
can easily switch between console and X, but it's still inconvenient if you
are writing GUI apps.
>they compare to typical Windows/Dos IDE's. Are there GUI/Menu-
>driven programming environments available? If so, are they widely
See http://members.home.com/davecook/devel/
Dave Cook
--
No Linux for you!
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development.system) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Development-System Digest
******************************
