Linux-Development-Sys Digest #102, Volume #7 Tue, 24 Aug 99 21:14:18 EDT
Contents:
Re: gdb trace of GUI apps core dumping on printf's (Arief Hasani)
Re: Jesus: the ultimate OS (Selious)
Re: spin lock (Tristan Wibberley)
Re: why not C++? (Tristan Wibberley)
Re: Reverse engineer of serial protocol or Ericsson SH888 (Jonathan A. Buzzard)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Christopher Browne)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Christopher Browne)
Re: what about SGI's xfs? (Christopher Browne)
Re: threads (Christopher Browne)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (void)
Re: C++ templates: More than Turing Complete? (Phil Hunt)
Re: upgrade linux kernel (Paul Kimoto)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Christopher Browne)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Peter Samuelson)
Re: what about SGI's xfs? (XuYifeng)
Re: Jesus: the ultimate OS ("Paul E. Lehmann")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Arief Hasani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.g++.help,comp.windows.x.kde,linux.dev.c-programming,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: gdb trace of GUI apps core dumping on printf's
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 03:33:15 +0800
Dimi Shahbaz wrote:
>
> OK, I ran kapptemplate (a simple code generator script for creating simple,
> empty KDE applications) , and with the resulting code, I added this line to
> the testWidget constructor:
>
> testWidget::testWidget(QWidget *parent, const char *name)
> : QWidget(parent, name)
> {
> printf("line 1\nline 2\nline 3\n");
> }
>
> This is similar to what I've always done; putting printf's in various
> places in my code (even GUI code) is how I like to debug, and it has never
> given me problems. Now, however, the line above gets me a core dump
> (without the printf, the program runs without problems):
>
> $ ./test
> line 1
> Segmentation fault (core dumped)
>
> It prints the first line OK, but whenever there are 2 newlines, either in
> the same printf, or total in different ones, my programs are now dumping
> core. I dont know what could cause this, because it worked before. Here
> is a gdb backtrace of the core:
>
> #0 0x5523c08 in ?? ()
> #1 0x402627e7 in _IO_new_file_xsputn (f=0x805b3a0, data=0x8059570, n=21)
> at fileops.c:822
> #2 0x8055e88 in filebuf::xsputn () at testwidget.moc.cpp:57
> #3 0x40252980 in _IO_vfprintf (s=0x805b3a0, format=0x8059570 "line 1\nline
> 2\nline 3\n", ap=0xbffffae4)
> at vfprintf.c:1048
> #4 0x4025a720 in printf (format=0x8059570 "line 1\nline 2\nline 3\n") at
> printf.c:31
> #5 0x80516ba in testWidget::testWidget (this=0x80861c8, parent=0x8085a10,
> name=0x0) at testwidget.cpp:6
> #6 0x805117f in test::test (this=0x8085a10) at test.cpp:14
> #7 0x805180d in main (argc=1, argv=0xbffffd14) at main.cpp:15
>
> Seemed at first to be a screwy glibc (in file fileops.c), so I reinstalled
> it from the rpm, but same results. If I run:
>
> $ ./test &> ./output
>
> The program runs normally, putting my printf with all 3 lines in the file
> 'output', as well as running the empty gui app itself, but after I hit exit
> in the program, I get a seg fault, and the backtrace there is:
>
> #0 0x8c08055e in ?? ()
> #1 0x4022e5e4 in exit (status=0) at exit.c:62
>
> Again, this is glibc (exit.c is in glibc, isnt?) Does anyone have any
> ideas as to what this could be? Has anyone experienced anything similar?
>
> RH5.2, x86, qt-1.42, kde-1.1.1, glibc-2.1.1-7, egcs-2.90.29 980515
> (egcs-1.0.3 release)
>
> Thank you very much in advance,
> Dimi
I think you should use fprintf(stderr,"whatever"); instead, try it, let
me know of any luck
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 23:09:08 +0200
From: Selious <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Jesus: the ultimate OS
> I'm going to name my OS "Jesus". It will coded primarily to destroy all
> "EVIL" objects os's and computers. Only the objects that "LOVE" Jesus
> will survive and communicate with "Jesus".
OK, my OS, named Gates, is going to represent the evil in society...
Let's see who wins, hehehe
--
pii350.ntdom: up 24 days, 22:55,
linux.ntdom: up 118 days, 22:33,
nw411.ntdom 112 days, 14:31
nwtest.ntdom 123 days, 20:57
alpha.ntdom: 1:06am up 59 days,
linux4.ntdom: up 105 days, 58
freebsd.ntdom: up 19 days, 3:03,
------------------------------
From: Tristan Wibberley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: spin lock
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 00:07:56 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
David Lee wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> Is there any documentaton about how to use those spinlock
> kernel functions?
less /usr/src/linux/Documentations/spinlocks.txt
--
Tristan Wibberley
------------------------------
From: Tristan Wibberley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: why not C++?
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 00:19:57 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Johan Kullstam wrote:
>
> one thing that bothers me in C++ is the lack of additional operations.
> for example, in matrix math, you might want two kinds of
> multiplication. element-wise or as a matrix. matlab uses .* and *
> respectively. C++ doesn't offer any new operators. if C++ had a few
> unnassigned operations, you could overload them with perhaps less
> confusion than redefining something as basic as addition.
A general operator syntax, now that would be nice :)
C = A `x B; // cross product
C = A `. B; // dot product
or something like that - What trigraph would you use for that symbol,
\\' maybe.
C = A \\'x B;
C = A \\'. B;
heehee :)
--
Tristan Wibberley
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonathan A. Buzzard)
Subject: Re: Reverse engineer of serial protocol or Ericsson SH888
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 20:16:23 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Nigel Tamplin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> Some months ago I came across a discussion where someone was capturing
> the
> serial data between a Windows machine and the scanner so that they could
> reverse engineer the protocol.
>
> I would like to know how this is done.
>
This was most probably achieved by running portmon from www.sysinternals.com
a nifty little program that can hook the serial.vxd and generate a log of
all the traffic on the serial port.
JAB.
--
Jonathan A. Buzzard Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Northumberland, United Kingdom. Tel: +44(0)1661-832195
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 00:20:21 GMT
On 24 Aug 1999 18:16:50 GMT, Vladimir Z. Nuri
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.misc Thomas Steffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Vladimir Z. Nuri) writes:
>
>: If it is as brialliant a design as you claim, it shouldn't be too
>: difficult to realise. There have been a few complex and elegant OSes
>: written from scratches with very little effort in a past.
>
>ah, but surely we can assert that the more brilliant & visionary
>the design, the more difficult it is to pull it off, typically..
>not so much because of the code, but because of the psychological
>resistance to it. I tend to agree that it will be both easy
>and hard. hard, to get people to agree on the vision. easy, once
>people see the vision. an appropriate taoist paradox.
"They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the
Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."
-- Carl Sagan
--
Functions delay binding; data structures induce binding.
"Moral: Structure data late in the programming process."
-- Alan Perlis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 00:20:22 GMT
On 24 Aug 1999 19:30:57 GMT, void <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 24 Aug 1999 06:41:17 GMT, Vladimir Z. Nuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>wow, an oldtimer in cyberspace. I think I posted about 60 days
>>ago or something like that. the mind reels that anyone
>>can remember that far back.
>
>I remember it too. In fact, ISTR that that wasn't the first posting
>either, is that right?
>
>Do you have anything new? I mean, the requirements doc is the same, but
>do you have any other design docs yet?
I seem to recall there being some bad definitional problems; people
asked what precisely was meant by "object oriented" and no useful
answers were forthcoming.
Look at the would-be answer to the question "what is an OS?" and see
how the inability to provide definitions has extended to encompass
that as well...
--
"You'll be rid of most of us when BSD-detox or GNU comes out, which
should happen in the next few months (yeah, right)." -- Richard
Tobin, 1992. [BSD did follow within a year]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/oses.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: what about SGI's xfs?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 00:20:24 GMT
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 12:33:21 +0800, XuYifeng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Can anyone tell me what the current status of the integration
>> of SGI xfs (journaling) file system in Linux is. In which version
>> will it most probably be integrated?
>
>I think it will be in Kernel 3.0,
When the code isn't yet available, and the development team is
apparently trying to start thinking about a "freeze" in preparation
for 2.4, it seems unlikely for XFS to make it in before 2.5.
>but I prefer there will have a ACL (Access controll list) for file
>system, the traditional User-Group-Other model is too simply, and not
>powerful.
The problem with ACLs is roughly threefold:
a) Support needs to be added to the kernel. This is the easy part.
b) ACL metadata needs to be attached to filesystems. There is not yet
agreement as to how best to do this.
c) Applications need to be modified to be ACL-aware.
Without all three parts, they're pretty much useless. It seems likely
that people will need to "cope" with establishing security based on
the present regime.
ACLs may provide the ability to more precisely "tie down" security
than is possible with UGO; it is not, however, obvious that there are
good usage models available to make them usable.
I'd argue that it needs to be looked at further, perhaps with a view
to a capabilities-based approach, perhaps as was used with TOPS-10
with FILDAE, before jumping into implementing anything.
<http://x16.dejanews.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=435914490.1=923406353.1141047422=0>
--
"That's convenience, not cracker-proofing. Security is an emergent
property, not a feature." -- void <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/linuxkernel.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: threads
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 00:20:29 GMT
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 14:44:21 -0600, Bill Burris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Randall Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I find the whining of Unix programmers about threads to be kinda like
>> baby duck syndrome. What, I have to learn something about an API that
>> didn't first show up on Unix and that Unixes competitors have been
>> touting as an advantage for years? Well, given that Unix isn't going to
>> be getting VMS's queued IO model then kernel level threading is, IMO, the
>> next best thing.
>
>The book I just read claimed that the first complete implementation of
>Threads was in Mach, developed at CM. Steve Jobs had the chance to provide
>some competition for Microsoft but he destroyed his company producing groovy
>hardware instead of realizing that Mach and the software they built around
>it was the ticket to success.
>
>Would Linux gain anything by having its kernel replaced by Mach?
Replacing a kernel that happens to work is a rather daunting task that
people won't do simply because of a question like this.
On The Other Hand, the Debian/Hurd project (URLs below) is seeking to
build a usable system based on:
a) GNU Mach (the GNU-hacked version of Mach),
b) The set of Hurd daemons that run atop Mach,
c) GLIBC, which provides interfaces to be used by programs, and then
d) A Whole Pile Of Debian Software.
In effect, this takes a bunch of "Linux" software and runs it atop
Hurd.
There are probably a dozen people working on this, mixed between:
- Hurd Kernel hackers
- Mach hackers (probably two people)
- A Grub hacker (Grub ~= LILO)
- And others that are "porting" Debian software to run on Hurd.
Plans for the future include:
- Creating an ORB that would run at the Mach level, and
- Porting Hurd to run on something other than Mach. (Possibly Fiasco,
although 'tis not clear yet.)
It should be completely clear that there is *no* benefit to the
approach until it is sufficiently featureful and robust as to
represent a reasonable replacement for Linux in the eyes of a
substantial number of users.
The fact that there is now an installable version of Hurd for which
there are actually usable instructions and a nontrivial number of
software packages represents a massive improvement over the situation
of a year ago.
It is nonetheless still greatly early to consider it "competitive"
with Linux.
And it is definitely too early for people to use it as a platform to
use for "vastly better threading."
I'd suggest the thought that the person who wants to "prove" that
should probably be the person that implements an ORB that runs at the
Mach level.
--
"I am aware of the benefits of a micro kernel approach. However, the
fact remains that Linux is here, and GNU isn't --- and people have
been working on Hurd for a lot longer than Linus has been working on
Linux." Ted T'so, 1992.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/oshurd.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (void)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: 24 Aug 1999 19:30:57 GMT
On 24 Aug 1999 06:41:17 GMT, Vladimir Z. Nuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>wow, an oldtimer in cyberspace. I think I posted about 60 days
>ago or something like that. the mind reels that anyone
>can remember that far back.
I remember it too. In fact, ISTR that that wasn't the first posting
either, is that right?
Do you have anything new? I mean, the requirements doc is the same, but
do you have any other design docs yet?
--
Ben
[X] YES! I'm a brain-damaged lemur on crack, and I'd like to
order your software package for $459.95!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Hunt)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: C++ templates: More than Turing Complete?
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 99 15:57:57 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <7pu50r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] "Ulrich Weigand" writes:
> Eh? C++ is of course Turing complete, but so is every assembly language
> to which it might be compiled ... I don't know of *any* programming
> language in real use that is *not* Turing complete, b.t.w.;
How about the C preprocessor?
> there isn't
> really much that is necessary to achieve Turing completeness (if you
> have something like elementary arithmetic, assignment, and conditional jump,
> that's already enough ...).
>
--
Phil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Kimoto)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: upgrade linux kernel
Date: 24 Aug 1999 15:35:20 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Hung P. Tran wrote:
> When I try to recompile the kernel using "make zImage",
> I receive an error of duplicate variable from
> /usr/src/linux/arch/i386/lib/checksum.c.
In the future, it would be helpful for you to quote the _exact_
error message. In this case, I believe that you are having the
following problem (quoted from Deja archives, which you could
have used as well):
There is no (ix86) checksum.c file in the 2.2 kernel series. It must
be left over from some old kernel source. Delete it.
--
Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 00:18:08 GMT
[Followup redirected...]
On 24 Aug 1999 06:36:24 GMT, Vladimir Z. Nuri
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Christopher R. Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: However after examining your constraint "wish list" I find nothing that
>: the current OS's don't already do.
>
>bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt. every item in the essay emphasizes how its
>description varies from all existing OSes. there are many examples
>listed, but one of my favorites is the way that win95 cannot
>handle the simple problem of viruses.
Have you considered posting this to an *appropriate* newsgroup, as
opposed to posting it to UNIX- and Linux-related newsgroups where it
is about as appropriate as bringing ham hocks to a bar mitzvah?
--
"The X-Files are too optimistic. The truth is *not* out there..."
-- Anthony Ord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
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: 24 Aug 1999 19:11:18 -0500
Reply-To: Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[Vladimir Z. Nuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> ah, but surely we can assert that the more brilliant & visionary the
> design, the more difficult it is to pull it off, typically.. not so
> much because of the code, but because of the psychological resistance
> to it.
Note that the converse is not true, as I recall arguing with you in the
past. (Yes, I too was around two months ago!) In other words --
perhaps something truly visionary will meet with psychological
resistance, but this DOES NOT MEAN that if your ideas meet with
psychological resistance that they must therefore be brilliant. Who
was it that said it? "They laughed at Einstein, they laughed at
Galileo, they laughed at Edison, but they also laughed at Bozo the
Clown."
--
Peter Samuelson
<sampo.creighton.edu!psamuels>
------------------------------
From: XuYifeng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: what about SGI's xfs?
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 12:33:21 +0800
I think it will be in Kernel 3.0, but I prefer there will have a ACL
(Access controll list)
for file system, the traditional User-Group-Other model is too simply,
and not powerful.
XuYifeng
Arnoud de Geus wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can anyone tell me what the current status of the integration
> of SGI xfs (journaling) file system in Linux is. In which version
> will it most probably be integrated?
>
> Reg's, Arnoud.
------------------------------
From: "Paul E. Lehmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Jesus: the ultimate OS
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 20:06:15 -0400
Hmmm,
Ok, Lets see. Jesus was one of many so called "Healers and Messiahs" of his
day"
If you believe that such an individual actually existed then it can be said
that he was rather fond of the juice of the grape, could quite possibly have
been gay, practiced the arts of a magician and had extreme contempt for non
Jews. Are you sure you want to name your OS after JC? Just think of the
many many cruelities that were / are commited in "His" name. You may be
better off to name your OS after some scientific fact as opposed to
witchcraft and superstition.
I know that many consider their OS a religion but aren't you going a bit
far?
Christopher R. Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
> >
> > an HTML version of this article can be found at:
> >
> > http://www8.pair.com/mnajtiv/tao.html
> >
>
> I'm going to name my OS "Jesus". It will coded primarily to destroy all
> "EVIL" objects os's and computers. Only the objects that "LOVE" Jesus
> will survive and communicate with "Jesus".
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
