Linux-Development-Sys Digest #636, Volume #8 Wed, 11 Apr 01 23:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor (Thore B. Karlsen)
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor (Thore B. Karlsen)
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor (Paul Shirley)
Re: New directions for kernel development ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: New directions for kernel development
Re: New directions for kernel development ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: usbutils ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: memory usage of program (Charles Herman)
Re: New directions for kernel development (mlw)
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: New directions for kernel development (Alexander Viro)
Re: Limit in variable size in device driver? (David)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thore B. Karlsen)
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 00:23:55 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001 00:21:35 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thore B. Karlsen)
wrote:
>>> It's not an ideological issue. People like vi because
>>> it's a great editor. Who the hell wants to edit text
>>> with a GUI editor? It's plain nuts. Think about it.
>>> It's like using a GUI to drive your car.
>>vi is like Reverse Polish Notation. It has a steeper learning curve but
>>once you learn it, there's no going back.
>That's an interesting thought. I also use RPN and vi, and I love both. I can
>see how they might go hand in hand.
>
>What I like about RPN and vi is that you string together many small
>operations to do one big operation, instead of having one big operation that
>does everything.
Another thing -- that's also the reason I love assembly language.
I sense a pattern. :)
--
"By the time we've finished with him, he won't know whether
he's Number Six or the cube root of infinity!"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thore B. Karlsen)
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 00:21:35 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001 23:59:39 GMT, Hansang Bae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> It's not an ideological issue. People like vi because
>> it's a great editor. Who the hell wants to edit text
>> with a GUI editor? It's plain nuts. Think about it.
>> It's like using a GUI to drive your car.
>vi is like Reverse Polish Notation. It has a steeper learning curve but
>once you learn it, there's no going back.
That's an interesting thought. I also use RPN and vi, and I love both. I can
see how they might go hand in hand.
What I like about RPN and vi is that you string together many small
operations to do one big operation, instead of having one big operation that
does everything.
--
"By the time we've finished with him, he won't know whether
he's Number Six or the cube root of infinity!"
------------------------------
From: Paul Shirley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Paul Shirley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 01:19:13 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Syntax highlighting is useful for NOVICE programmers.
>
>Most experienced programmers have used one-color text
>for program code for years...
...although the ones that earn a living at it mostly side with the
novices.
--
Paul Shirley
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: New directions for kernel development
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 00:47:13 GMT
Random troll posing as Linus Torvalds <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Recently, I've been thinking a lot about where Linux development
> should head now that 2.4 is out. Specifically, I've been thinking
> about how we ought to make some cultural changes as well as
> technical changes. Now I'm not *entirely* sure what directions we
> should head in as we move towards 3.0, but I'd like to point out a
> few areas that need to be addressed as well as propose some possible
> solutions. Nothing is set in stone yet, but these are definitely
> issues we need to work on.
.. So far, so plausible...
> First off, I don't like a lot of the elitism that does on among
> Linux hackers. Just because you can tell what the following script
> does without executing it, doesn't mean that you're some kind of
> god.
> #! /usr/bin/perl
> @k = unpack "a"x5,'x_,d@';@o = unpack "a"x19,'Q8>tUxLm\@`Y%N@cIq]';
> while ($i<19){print chr((ord($o[$i])-ord($k[$i++%5])+91)%91+32);}
.. And this lays down a "hook" for those that don't feel all that "elite" ...
> Learning to hack Un*x is an impressive accomplishment, but it's
> closer kin to solving a Rubik�s cube than scaling Everest. If you
> think using Un*x makes you some kind of super genius who should be
> feared by mere mortals and end users, either get over it
.. Still fairly reasonable ...
> or start using *BSD. *BSD users (and developers) are all complete
> jackasses, so you'll fit right in.
.. Now you're hooked, and may not notice that things are heading off
in a wild direction...
> Secondly, I'd like to address the issue of cleanliness. Quite
> frankly, the standards of personal hygiene practiced by many members
> of this community are simply unacceptable. As you all know, I am a
> fairly clean cut, well-kempt person (I know, I have a bit of a gut,
> but compared to Maddog, Nick Petreley or ESR, I'm a modern Adonis.),
> and in the Linux community that is something of an anomaly.
> Virtually all users of Linux (and all other forms of Un*x) are
> unkempt, longhaired, beast-bearded dirty GNU hippies, and I am sick
> and tired of having to deal with them.
Hee, hee...
> The person I have the greatest problem with is that (in)famous
> communist RMS. Now, RMS may have been responsible for GNU, the GPL,
> GCC and many other contributions to the computing community, but his
> stance, as well as stench, displayed in his essays and actions,
> nauseates me. I mean, with that filth-ridden beard of his, where
> does he have room to demand that people refer to Linux as GNU /
> Linux? When he is as clean-shaven as I, he may claim that right, but
> until then, he should go back to playing his little flute and
> dropping acid like there�s no tomorrow. Honestly, if he doesn�t shut
> his mouth and go back to reading Marx, I�m going to shut it for
> him. I am sorry to sound so harsh, but a little hygiene every once
> in a while is a Good Thing(TM). Makes me wish I'd gone with a closed
> source license back in the day.
Of course, the "Microsoft-style-single-quotes" should be a dead
giveaway that something is amiss. Others might want to observe
something about the fact that Finland was actually adjacent to a Major
Communist Power, or inject other bits of reality...
The remainder is just silly...
--
(reverse (concatenate 'string "ac.notelrac.teneerf@" "454aa"))
http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/resume.html
"There are three kinds of program statements: sequence, repetition,
and seduction."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: New directions for kernel development
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 01:19:22 -0000
In article <lW6B6.144379$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Random troll posing as Linus Torvalds <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Recently, I've been thinking a lot about where Linux development
>> should head now that 2.4 is out. Specifically, I've been thinking
>> about how we ought to make some cultural changes as well as
>> technical changes. Now I'm not *entirely* sure what directions we
>> should head in as we move towards 3.0, but I'd like to point out a
>> few areas that need to be addressed as well as propose some possible
>> solutions. Nothing is set in stone yet, but these are definitely
>> issues we need to work on.
>.. So far, so plausible...
Yes...
>> Linux hackers. Just because you can tell what the following script
>> does without executing it, doesn't mean that you're some kind of
>> god.
>> #! /usr/bin/perl
>> @k = unpack "a"x5,'x_,d@';@o = unpack "a"x19,'Q8>tUxLm\@`Y%N@cIq]';
>> while ($i<19){print chr((ord($o[$i])-ord($k[$i++%5])+91)%91+32);}
>.. And this lays down a "hook" for those that don't feel all that "elite" ...
Only for those impressed by Perl spew. Obfuscated C code would be a lot
more impressive.
--
http://www.spinics.net/linux.
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: New directions for kernel development
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 03:12:18 +0200
In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Random troll posing as Linus Torvalds <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Of course, the "Microsoft-style-single-quotes" should be a dead
> giveaway that something is amiss. Others might want to observe
> something about the fact that Finland was actually adjacent to a Major
> Communist Power, or inject other bits of reality...
> The remainder is just silly...
I thought it was actually very good. Did you trace the headers? If I
had had to judge on style and sophistication alone, I would have said
it was in Linus' range ... and the final acronym is a traditional touch
that signs it nicely.
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: usbutils
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 03:33:42 +0200
> "Phil Ehrens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9alept$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Yes.
>>
>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/linuxusbguide
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >I am trying to get usbutils working from http://www.linux-usb.org which is
>> >reputed to be like pciutils. I untarred it, ran ./configure, make then make
>> >install and it created two binaries (lsusb and usbmodules) and some manual
>> >pages, so I believe it compiled and installed as the install readme
>> >indicated. It even runs. Unfortunately when I invoke it, it complains about
>> >a missing /proc/bus/usb. I think that mknod might be appropriate to
It does that here too, and usb works fine (kernel 2.2.15)
oboe:/usr/oboe/ptb/src/usbutils-0.7% lsusb
Cannot open USB ID database /usr/local/share/usb.ids
cannot open /proc/bus/usb, No such file or directory (2)
(note .. see the difference between providing useful information taht
can be used as debugging, and providing a useless partial second-hand
account, such as the one you have given ..)
Indeed, /proc/bus/usb is not around. A quick look reveals that
it's on the 2.4.* kernels, not the 2.2.* ones. Yep .. moving over to
2.4.0 and all "works". Can't say that it's any use, however ...
sudo ./lsusb
Password:
Cannot open USB ID database /usr/local/share/usb.ids
Bus 001 Device 001: ID 0000:0000
Device Descriptor:
bLength 18
bDescriptorType 1
bcdUSB 1.00
...
Peter
------------------------------
From: Charles Herman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: memory usage of program
Date: 12 Apr 2001 01:51:07 GMT
Juergen Heinzl wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Herman wrote:
> >Is there a function I can call from within a C/C++ program that will
> >tell me how much memory the program is using? If so, what is it?
> [-]
> getrusage(2) may help.
>
> Ta',
> Juergen
>
> --
> \ Real name : Juergen Heinzl \ no flames /
> \ EMail Private : [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ send money instead /
I tried getrusage() and all memory sizes returned were 0. Am I doing
something wrong? Here is the program
=================================================================================
#include <iostream.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <sys/time.h>
#include <sys/resource.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#define SIZE 100000
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
struct rusage CODE_USAGE;
double * bigarray;
bigarray = new double[SIZE];
for (int k=0; k < 1000 ; k++)
{
for (int i=0; i < SIZE; i++)
{
bigarray[i] = (double) i;
}
}
cout << "page size " << getpagesize() << endl;
int exit_status = getrusage(RUSAGE_SELF, &CODE_USAGE);
cout << "exit status " << exit_status << endl;
cout << "max resident size " << CODE_USAGE.ru_maxrss << endl;
cout << "integral resident size " << CODE_USAGE.ru_ixrss << endl;
delete bigarray;
exit_status = getrusage(RUSAGE_SELF, &CODE_USAGE);
cout << "exit status " << exit_status << endl;
double endTime = CODE_USAGE.ru_utime.tv_sec;
cout << "tot time " << endTime << endl;
cout << CODE_USAGE.ru_maxrss << endl;
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
===============================================================================
Here is the output
page size 4096
exit status 0
max resident size 0
integral resident size 0
exit status 0
tot time 2
0
I am using RH 7.0.
-Charles
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development
Subject: Re: New directions for kernel development
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 21:57:02 -0400
While it is obvious that the perpetrator has some basic skills, it is clear
that taste is not one of them.
--
I'm not offering myself as an example; every life evolves by its own laws.
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 22:23:01 -0400
Hansang Bae wrote:
>
> In article <2I0B6.81278$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > If vi cost money, I'd buy a license.
>
> I would as well....
>
> > Right. Which is why so many of us prefer vi. When you
> > have to sit there editing stuff for hours and hours,
> > you eventually get tired of playing chords (Emacs) or
> > using a mouse (GUI-based editors like UltraEdit, TextPad).
> > You start wishing you just had an editor that would let you
> > do things as efficiently as possible, with the least amount
> > of carpal-tunnel abuse.
>
> For some things, editing with a rodent can actually save some time.
>
very rarely.
>
> > As for features like syntax highlighting -- sure, gvim
> > supports this very well. But say you're editing 20,000-line
> > Fortran 77 codes, day after day, month after month. The
> > syntax highlighting gets burned into your retina; it
> > becomes unbearable. I have to leave it turned off. This
>
> I too find syntax highlighting very intrusive. Never got used to it
> since (when I use to write programs) green or amber was the only option.
>
> > It's not an ideological issue. People like vi because
> > it's a great editor. Who the hell wants to edit text
> > with a GUI editor? It's plain nuts. Think about it.
> > It's like using a GUI to drive your car.
>
> vi is like Reverse Polish Notation. It has a steeper learning curve but
> once you learn it, there's no going back. I was a die-hard user of EDT
> (funny, no one has mentioned it yet). I was a PFx hitting fool!! My
> Procomm 2.4.2 was programmed with all my favorite PF combos. Until I saw
> my prof edit my program with 'vi'. I kept asking, "hey, how'd you do
> that so fast???"
>
> I took my first HP41CV back to the store because (said I) RPN SUCKS!! AND
> WHERE THE HELL's THE ENTER KEY!!!!
>
> Then I sat there as my classmates breezed through problem after problem
> while I was stuck in the (((())))) world. Went back, learned RPN and
> NEVER looked back.
>
> I've been using vi for quite a while and my .exrc is not even that
> complicated. It centers, it has block cuts, it replaces hard tabs with
> spaces and a few other creature comforts.
>
> Sometimes I use UltraEdit because it's right for the job. Sometimes I
> use "DOS EDIT" because it's right for the job. But mostly, I love my vi
>
> :ZZ
>
> --
> "Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
> ********************************************************************
> Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
> reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
> ********************************************************************
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: New directions for kernel development
Date: 11 Apr 2001 22:41:50 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[snip the repost of AFD posting taken from l-k]
Cute. Now, get a life and learn the difference between posting AFD jokes
on April 1 and _reposting_ them on April 11. BTW, if you start forging
headers, do it right and set NNTP-Posting-Date.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David)
Subject: Re: Limit in variable size in device driver?
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 02:32:54 GMT
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:29:31 +0000, Kasper Dupont
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If it is not inside any function it cannot be on any
>stack. It sounds a litle strange that increasing the
>size of an array can crash the system, the only
>posible explanation I can think of is the one that the
>sizeof() function is used somewhere to find the size
>of this array. If it is used to copy the contents into
>another array which you have not made larger that can
>explain the crash.
>
>If this is not the case my only sugestion is to
>experiment with different sizes. Try 16000 and see
>what happens, try different sizes and see what range
>of sizes actually work.
>
>--
>Kasper Dupont
Hmm....I am really quite puzzled too why would the kernel not be able
to take in an array larger than a certain amount of bytes. Maybe I can
give you the whole picture....here goes...
This char array is declared in an audio device driver. It is declared
globally.
In audio_ep7212.c,
static int mcp_major;
........(other variables)......
char buffer[4608]; <------------------
........(other variables)......
static void mcp_open(............)
{
........
}
static void mcp_close(...........)
{
}
/* a list of such functions continue */
-- end of device driver -----
This driver is compiled together with the kernel. It is an inline
driver...meaning it is not a module. It is loaded automatically when
the kernel boots.
B'cos I am playing a wave file streamed down over the internet, a
larger buffer will reduce the clicks that I am experiencing. So I
modified the driver by increasing the buffer size. I added a zero to
that number....becomes 46080. Now if the kernel tries to
boot....towards the end of the booting process...there will always be
an oops error...a memory dereference is unable to find the right page.
So somehow the buffer size is overridding some important data.
There is no sizeof() function called to get the size of this buffer. I
am sure of this because I did trace through quite a number of source
files. Besides, it is like this actually....
#define BUF_SIZE 4608
char buffer[BUF_SIZE];
So all reference are made using BUF_SIZE.
Now this whole thing is running on an ARM development board, not on
the PC. So I got a way to boot the kernel from memory and not from the
FLASH memory. When I boot the kernel from memory (that is, download
the kernel over a network and then boot it there), there is no such
error. Everything is perfect. The driver works properly too. But the
moment I burnt the kernel into the FLASH and then boots it, the oops
error appears. If I reduce the buffer back to original size, the oops
error disappears completely.
So does anyone have any ideas?
Best Regards,
David
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to the
comp.os.linux.development.system newsgroup.
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
******************************
