Linux-Development-Sys Digest #802, Volume #6 Wed, 9 Jun 99 09:14:32 EDT
Contents:
gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11 (Nigel Tamplin)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Re: Run time measurement with micro (or at least milli)-second resolution help
please (Wolfgang Denk)
Re: EGCS problem - RH6.0 (Igor Zlatkovic)
Re: Run time measurement with micro (or at least milli)-second resolution help
please (Robert Kaiser)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Re: new kernel: LILO "kernel too big" error (Usseglio Gaudi Francesco)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Re: EGCS problem - RH6.0 ("Tom Leete")
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS ("Hayden Walles")
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Peter Samuelson)
Re: EGCS problem - RH6.0 (Mark Tranchant)
Re: help (Johan Kullstam)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Re: Linux & Cybercafe (Maurice Kemmann)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Donal K. Fellows)
EGCS problem - RH6.0 (root)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nigel Tamplin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 23:19:04 +0100
Hi,
I keep getting the following error when compiling large programs on my
Red hat 6 intel box.
gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11
I have had the error when compiling postgres-6.4.2 and also
openssl-0.9.3a, the source code compiles cleanly on my Red Hat 5.2
machine but not on my Red hat 6.0 machine.
Any ideas?
Cheers,
Nigel
email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 07:01:42 GMT
Crispin Cowan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: You then go on in discussion with various parties to demonstrate that
: you have no idea what you are talking about, making your "expert
: opinion" on such design issues seriously suspect. MANY people have
: wish lists, and most of those people know far more about what they're
: talking about than you do. So we cannot just take your word for it.
: You must either substantiate your design with scholarly justifications
: or with an implementation and experiments before anyone can take you
: seriously.
"write it all yourself and give it to me, and then I will stop calling you
a bozo.. otherwise you have nothing and are wasting my time..
and please shut up meantime while you are working on it"
--
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
"in theory, there's no difference [EMAIL PROTECTED]
between theory and practice, mad genius research lab
but in practice there is!" http://www8.pair.com/mnajtiv/
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 07:03:51 GMT
David Fox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: A simple example would be the fact that you often want to use a
: variety of tools to operate on a single document. If each document is
: bound to a single tool you have a problem. And this type of problem
: gets worse as you start thinking hard about the lower level details of
: a system.
excuse me, but it seems patently ridiculous to me to suggest
this can't be accomplished within a standard object-oriented paradigm.
and this is exactly the problem addressed by the essay I posted.
--
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
"in theory, there's no difference [EMAIL PROTECTED]
between theory and practice, mad genius research lab
but in practice there is!" http://www8.pair.com/mnajtiv/
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
From: Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Run time measurement with micro (or at least milli)-second resolution
help please
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 06:51:05 GMT
Virasit Imtawil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am sorry if this is not where I should write but I would like your
>help. I am a beginner here. I use Redhat linux (kernel 2.0.32). I would
>like to know how to measure CPU executing time within the C source code in
>micro (or at least milli)-second resolution. I tried clock() command but
>it's just second resolution which is extremely coarse. For example, I have
You are wrong; clock() has microsecond resolution. Just RTFM:
... to get the number of seconds used, divide by
CLOCKS_PER_SEC
CLOCKS_PER_SEC is defined by ISO/IEC 9899:1990 7.12.1:
The macro `CLOCKS_PER_SEC' is the number per second of the
value returned by the `clock' function.
and CAE XSH, Issue 4, Version 2:
The value of CLOCKS_PER_SEC is required to be 1 million on
all XSI-conformant systems.
So the time returned by clock() is in us, but that does not mean that
you really get this resolution on your system - since there are only
100 ticks per sec on standard Linux you should not expect to get
anything better than 10ms.
But 10ms is still much less than seconds :-)
Wolfgang
--
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: -88 Home: -86 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A memorandum is written not to inform the reader, but to protect the
writer. -- Dean Acheson
------------------------------
From: Igor Zlatkovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EGCS problem - RH6.0
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 08:15:26 +0000
For some reason, the linker did not link your program with the std c++
library. These operators like << and streams like cout are defined there.
Actually, the linker should link with it without any special consideration
or parameter. Did you perhaps name the file <something>.c? If the file
extension is .c, then egcs ran the C compiler instead of C++.
By the way, 12.50 per hour is miserable :-)
Ciao
--
Igor Zlatkovic mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
University of Applied Sciences, Frankfurt, Germany, EU
"If at first you don't succeed, redefine success."
-- /usr/bin/fortune, 12.5.1999.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Kaiser)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Run time measurement with micro (or at least milli)-second resolution
help please
Date: 9 Jun 1999 07:16:06 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Virasit Imtawil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I use Redhat linux (kernel 2.0.32). I would
> like to know how to measure CPU executing time within the C source code in
> micro (or at least milli)-second resolution. I tried clock() command but
> it's just second resolution which is extremely coarse.
> [snip]
> is it possible to measure the time in executing any
> portion or loop within the code and print it out? Anyone who has some code
> to do this?
Have a look at gettimeofday() (man 2 gettimeofday). I'm sure that
it will give you at least tick (i.e. 10 milliseconds) resolution,
but I believe it actually goes down to microseconds.
Hope this helps
Rob
================================================================
Robert Kaiser email: rkaiser AT sysgo DOT de
SYSGO RTS GmbH
Mainz / Germany
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Vladimir Z. Nuri)
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 06:58:04 GMT
Thomas Boroske ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Errm - are you suggesting plug&play in windows doesn�t always work,
: simply because Microsoft didn�t recognize it as a "key design goal" ?
: Get real.
exactly. it was added way late into the evolutionary process, long after
there were many other standards for software/hardware installation
that it had to be compatible with. isn't this a totally
noncontroversial assertion?
: Just one simple question: Why should the OS be based on "objects" ?
: Yes, why ?
it is the integrated chip of the software world. it is a UNIFIED
FRAMEWORK. and I do believe the essay states this.
: If you think just the three points above are actually feasible by
: declaring them "key design goals" then you�re an idiot.
: Your "design document" is absolutely worthless unless you include some
: info on how to achieve them.
they can be achieved when people realize they are the goals that
need to drive development, not be pasted on after the whole thing
is complete, as exists today. as for "idiots".. hmmm no comment<g>
: Thank you, Vladimir, that you have shown us the error of our ways. I�m
: sure now that you have shown us the light, things will get better
: quickly.
hehehehe glad to be of service. you're welcome.
--
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
"in theory, there's no difference [EMAIL PROTECTED]
between theory and practice, mad genius research lab
but in practice there is!" http://www8.pair.com/mnajtiv/
------------------------------
From: Usseglio Gaudi Francesco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: new kernel: LILO "kernel too big" error
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 11:42:14 +0200
steve davidson wrote:
>
> I'm confused.
>
> re-built my RH 6 2.2.5 kernel last night, stripped out all of the junk that
> I don't need, added a couple of things in ( my selections are ok, I've been
> researching this for a while). Compiled OK, no error messages. Followed
> this procedure:
>
> make xconfig (configure...)
> make dep
> make clean
> make zImage
>
> make succeeds, I end up with a 426KB kernel.
>
> Ran Linuxconf, selected the 'install kernel I have compiled' option under
> LILO section, upon 'save config' selection I receive a 'kernel too big'
> error.
>
> OK, so I think that maybe linuxconf is screwy, so I manually edit the
> /etc/linux.conf file, adding the section
>
> image=/boot/newkernelz
> label=new
>
> between the existing image.. section and the other.. section ( I previously
> copied the new zImage to /boot/newkernelz ).
>
> Saved lilo.conf, ran lilo -v: Still get the error "kernel /boot/newkernelz
> is too big".
>
> I don't get it. The kernel which ships with RH 6 (vmlinuz-2.2.5-15) is
> 617,288 bytes, while my new kernel is 475,696 bytes. What gives?
>
> Any suggestions here?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Steve Davidson
I got the very same problem... I resolved it with make bzImage instead of make
zImage
Bye.
==+==
...era un mondo adulto...
...si sbagliava da professionisti.
Paolo Conte
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: 9 Jun 1999 07:24:11 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Vladimir Z. Nuri) writes:
> Thomas Boroske ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>: Just one simple question: Why should the OS be based on "objects" ?
>: Yes, why ?
>
> it is the integrated chip of the software world.
Get real. There's little if any binary convergence between
different compilers for the same language, and you need to
go up to a middleware like CORBA to be able to say that ...
> it is a UNIFIED FRAMEWORK.
And that's debatable, as there are many flavours of OO.
The most usable library in C++, for instance, is the
STL, and it uses a glorified macro processing facility.
> and I do believe the essay states this.
Now there you've got a point :-)
--
Stefaan
--
PGP key available from PGP key servers (http://www.pgp.net/pgpnet/)
___________________________________________________________________
Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add,
but when there is no longer anything to take away. -- Saint-Exup�ry
------------------------------
From: "Tom Leete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EGCS problem - RH6.0
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 04:45:47 -0400
I think the fix is simple
root wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>I am trying to compile the following code -
>
>--------
>#include <iostream.h>
Should be:
#include <iostream>
>
>float ComputePay(float hours, float rate)
>{
[...]
TML
------------------------------
From: "Hayden Walles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 12:23:26 +1200
G. Sumner Hayes wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Associating code and data tends
>to limit you to a single view of your data, precisely the sort
>of problem you want to avoid in a good UI
I notice you've told us this several times now. Since I'm not an HCI guru,
perhaps you might consent to tell us _why_ you want to avoid this problem in
a user interface.
Hayden Walles
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Samuelson)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: 9 Jun 1999 05:14:44 -0500
Reply-To: Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'll try to be gentle. No, I won't. Your implied insults, your
presumption and, above all, your condescending attitude are really
starting to piss me off. I don't think I'm alone.
[Vladimir Z. Nuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> "write it all yourself and give it to me, and then I will stop
> calling you a bozo.. otherwise you have nothing and are wasting my
> time.. and please shut up meantime while you are working on it"
Sir. No offense, but you are getting very tiresome. And possibly the
most tiresome aspect of your writing is your consistent tone of
self-centeredness, even to the point of martyrdom. (The next most
tiresome is the bluntness of your sarcasm. Subtlety in sarcasm is an
art form, and the inevitable misunderstandings are IMHO well worth it.)
Whenever *anyone* has challenged you, whether it be your ideas, your
presentation or anything else, you have continually asserted that
either (a) all of us just lack imagination and vision, and that's why
we don't understand what a wonderful work you have wrought, or (b) all
of us are just too set in our ways to accept something as radical and
refreshing as your vision, or (c) we the high priests of the old order
are offended and threatened by you, the dashing maverick who just might
be out to steal our show. As far as I can tell, you have *no* room in
your paradigm for possibility of having had even *one* stupid idea to
begin with, nor of *anyone* *else* knowing more about what you're
talking about than you do.
Might I add that as far as I can tell, none of us has expressed
anything that deserves (b) or (c). [As for (a), obviously I cannot
confirm or deny it while remaining logically self-consistent.]
Has it never occurred to you that your ideas *may* *possibly* have
generated a lot of criticism *not* because you're some sort of oracle
ahead of your time but because those ideas *really* *are* a load of
crap?
Have you never considered the possibility that when we say you don't
seem to know what you're talking about, it might be an *observation*
rather than just a backhanded flame?
Have you never considered the possibility that we are *not* out to
crucify people simply out of jealousy? Or out of defensiveness toward
our own culture/training? That there is *no* Vast Right-Wing
Conspiracy[tm] out to get you?
Have you never noticed that you have so far given us *remarkably*
*little* reason to pay attention to *anything* you say? It might sound
a touch elitist to you, but I freely admit that when evaluating ideas,
I take into consideration who is putting them forth. If someone whose
abilities and accomplishments I respect tells me something that sounds
silly or goes against my prejudices, I will think about it awhile
because I *know* the person must have a good reason for believing it,
and I also know my thoughts and ideas are not perfect. When *you*, on
the other hand, tell me something that sounds silly, I have no reason
to believe it is anything but silly.
That's right, you heard me. There *is* such a thing as the benefit of
the doubt, and you have *not* been doing very well earning it so far.
I don't see how you can expect better, especially since so far you been
more or less refusing to listen to any of *our* ideas, particularly
those that challenge yours.
An artist can draw a much prettier picture than an architect can, but
artists do not design bridges or skyscrapers. An artist could draw a
beautiful building, the architect could say "Nope, sorry, impossible"
and the architect would win. Not because he has something against the
artist, or feels threatened, but because he's most likely right. A
good architect does have to be something of an artist himself, but he
*also* needs to have training and experience in what is and is not
feasible, or his buildings will never be built.
--
Peter Samuelson
<sampo.creighton.edu!psamuels>
------------------------------
From: Mark Tranchant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EGCS problem - RH6.0
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 11:31:36 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Igor Zlatkovic wrote:
>
> For some reason, the linker did not link your program with the std c++
> library. These operators like << and streams like cout are defined there.
>
> Actually, the linker should link with it without any special consideration
> or parameter. Did you perhaps name the file <something>.c? If the file
> extension is .c, then egcs ran the C compiler instead of C++.
>
> By the way, 12.50 per hour is miserable :-)
DM12.50 per hour is indeed poor, but 12.50ukp per hour is not too bad.
:-)
Mark.
------------------------------
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: help
Date: 08 Jun 1999 09:18:17 -0400
"Song" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I can do some development on NT by C++, how to begin develope on
> Linux?
$ emacs hello.c
seriously, where do you want to begin?
1) install linux
2) make sure devel packages such as gcc, libc-devel &c are installed
3) start coding
> Thank you in advance
--
johan kullstam
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: 9 Jun 1999 10:54:20 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joel Garry) writes:
> On 5 Jun 1999 21:22:09 GMT, Stefaan A Eeckels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Once you have a HCI, *then* you can evaluate whether you need a new
>>toolkit (a la qt/KDE), a new windowing system (a la X, if your HCI
>>still uses the WIMP approach), an alternative to DCOM/CORBA, a different
>>file system paradigm, or (and I doubt it) a new OS or a new
>>hardware architecture.
>
> You have it all backwards. The coming ubiquity of computers makes the
> HCI irrelvant to this conceptual stage, as it is just a top layer, and
> should be interchangeable with many different interfaces. Thinking in
> terms of just a little screen showing a part of a desktop is way too
> limiting. The OS should be able to handle you walking along with
> your cellphone as an interface. Eh?
The user only sees, hears, feels, interacts with, the HCI. If the
HCI is to be a cellphone, then the OS will have to support this
HCI.
Is it really productive to say that as you don't know how
the HCI is going to turn out, one should start developing a new
OS based on principles that might (or might not) make supporting
the unknown HCI easier?
And where did I say that one should limit the HCI to a little
screen showing part of a desktop?
--
Stefaan
--
PGP key available from PGP key servers (http://www.pgp.net/pgpnet/)
___________________________________________________________________
Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add,
but when there is no longer anything to take away. -- Saint-Exup�ry
------------------------------
From: Maurice Kemmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.uu.comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Linux & Cybercafe
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 14:20:00 +0200
Hi !
MicroNg schrieb:
> I'm thinking of putting linux as the surf engine (with program like
> netscape communicator for linux)
> however, how to limit the access that so the user can only access the
> browser but NOT any other
> program ? ( to access other program, for eg for the webmaster to shutdown
> the computer, an passcode
> is required).
>
> any idea ?
You can configure the windowmanager without any xterm. So the users are
not able to start any other program. On the desktop you offer only the
browser. Login should be via xdm !
That's it i think !
Maurice
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: 9 Jun 1999 12:16:16 GMT
In article <jc473.4152$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jimen Ching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think you misunderstood me, because you just proved my point.
> Just as astronomers and astrologers shouldn't just accept CDM, so
> shouldn't CS professors and scientists accept 'open source'. The
> thoery and benefit behind 'open source' should be proven with data.
> I saw no data to back up the theories in ESR's papers. But the
> prof's and grad-students that attended the lecture accepted it
> without question.
I think they recognise it as peer-review, which has a (*very*) long
history of being pretty darned effective, especially so in the more
engineering disciplines (of which CS is one) where many eyeballs means
that many more problems get spotted...
Or are you going to suggest a "better" process than peer-review?
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- The small advantage of not having California being part of my country would
be overweighed by having California as a heavily-armed rabid weasel on our
borders. -- David Parsons <o r c @ p e l l . p o r t l a n d . o r . u s>
------------------------------
From: root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: EGCS problem - RH6.0
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 15:21:53 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am trying to compile the following code -
========
#include <iostream.h>
float ComputePay(float hours, float rate)
{
return hours * rate;
}
main()
{
double hours;
double payrate;
hours = 40;
payrate = 12.5;
cout << "The pay is: " << ComputePay(hours, payrate) << "\n";
return 0;
}
============
Compiling this code results in the following errors.
In function 'main':
undefined reference to 'cout'
undefined reference to 'ostream::operator<<(char const *)'
undefined reference to 'ostream::operator<<(float)'
undefined reference to 'ostream::operator<<(char const *)'
=============
I manually typed the above code and error messages in so take that into
account. I am not receiving any errors about 'iostream.h' missing.
Why is this happening?
Thanks,
tom
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
