RE: MIT shared memory extension
Robert Collins wrote:
In short, I don't like the idea of making key_t 32 bits.
I have taken deeper into ftok and have some questions:
1. Why do you use st_dev explicity. Isn't ftok() only for files ?
From the ftok documentation:
The ftok() function returns a key based on path and id that is usable in
subsequent calls to msgget(), semget() and shmget(). The path argument must be
the pathname of an existing file that the process is able to stat().
So st_dev seems to make no sense for me and could be removed.
2. Does st_ino creates uniq inodes rsp. hash values ? If so, why not (CASE1)
adding an ascii representation of id to the path and calling hash_path_name()
(the function which creates statbuf.st_ino) or (CASE2), using id as hash value
for hash_path_name() like the following code.
key_t
ftok(const char *path, int id)
{
struct stat statbuf;
// call stat() only as file existing check
if (stat(buf, statbuf))
{
/* stat set the appropriate errno for us */
return (key_t) -1;
}
#ifdef CASE1
char buf[MAX_PATH];
sprintf(buf,%s%08x,path,id);
return hash_path_name(0,buf);
#else /* CASE2 */
return hash_path_name(id,buf);
#endif
}
This would allow using the current 32 bit key_t implementation.
Ralf
FW: MIT shared memory extension
Ups, there were some wrong usages of path/buf in the last code example. Sorry.
key_t
ftok(const char *path, int id)
{
struct stat statbuf;
// call stat() only as file existing check
if (stat(path, statbuf))
{
/* stat set the appropriate errno for us */
return (key_t) -1;
}
#ifdef CASE1
char buf[MAX_PATH];
sprintf(buf,%s%08x,path,id);
return hash_path_name(0,buf);
#else /* CASE2 */
return hash_path_name(id,path);
#endif
}
Re: Legacy Installation of XFree86/Cygwin vs. Setup.exe XFree86 Packages
I haven't seen an answer to this one yet. Is that because no one knows? I'm in the same boat. -matt wilkie Randall R Schulz wrote: Hi, I installed XFree86/Cygwin via the semi-manual procedure that predates the release of Setup.exe packages. I want to know how I should handle switching over to the Setup.exe-based installation of XFree86/Cygwin. Should I just download the packages and install over the existing XFree86/Cygwin installation? (I always download binary source packages and then separately install only the binaries, keeping the sources in tarball form until I should happen to need them). If it matters, I've installed a couple of separate XFree86 software packages (XFig and the NCAR Graphics and NCL systems). The NCAR software installation isn't trivial, so if I could avoid having to redo it, that would be preferable. Thanks. Randall Schulz Mountain View, CA USA
RE: Legacy Installation of XFree86/Cygwin vs. Setup.exe XFree86 Packages
No one knows. You can install with setup.exe over top of your last installation, but you need to install *at leat* the same packages that you installed manually, else you won't get updates for all XFree86 packages, and you won't be able to uninstall all packages with setup.exe. Other than that, I don't think it will cause big problems, but someone should test it out and report back to us. Harold -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Matt Wilkie Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Legacy Installation of XFree86/Cygwin vs. Setup.exe XFree86 Packages I haven't seen an answer to this one yet. Is that because no one knows? I'm in the same boat. -matt wilkie Randall R Schulz wrote: Hi, I installed XFree86/Cygwin via the semi-manual procedure that predates the release of Setup.exe packages. I want to know how I should handle switching over to the Setup.exe-based installation of XFree86/Cygwin. Should I just download the packages and install over the existing XFree86/Cygwin installation? (I always download binary source packages and then separately install only the binaries, keeping the sources in tarball form until I should happen to need them). If it matters, I've installed a couple of separate XFree86 software packages (XFig and the NCAR Graphics and NCL systems). The NCAR software installation isn't trivial, so if I could avoid having to redo it, that would be preferable. Thanks. Randall Schulz Mountain View, CA USA
Re: Legacy Installation of XFree86/Cygwin vs. Setup.exe XFree86 Packages
Matt, Well, after waiting a while for some feedback, I took the plunge. I don't think there's a problem but... When (or after) I run XFree86/Cygwin, my system develops serious stability problems. The last time it happened, I first noticed that my dual-CPU system was showing only one CPU in the Task Manager Performance tab. That scared me, so I decided to reboot. More problem symptoms followed. When the boot process completed the hardware scan and got to the point where the Welcome to Windows 2000 low-resolution splash screen would be taken down and the monitor resolution switched, I instead got a long period of disk activity, which I took to be an automatically invoked file system check (I have all NTFS systems, so I'm not used to this happening and it alarmed me). There was no indication of what was happening (as their ordinarily would be for a checkdsk, either manually requested or automatically invoked). However, once that was done, the system booted normally. Nonetheless, I don't like things like this happening to my system. Now, I assume XFree86/Cygwin has no kernel or driver components and that this symptom points to a problem in the driver for my Matrox G400 MAX (which is the latest driver). Over the past couple of years since I've had this card, I've found that new Matrox drivers improve upon the old ones (they've fixed some odd symptoms in Java GUIs and in Mozilla) without any down-sides, but it appears that's not so this time. Anyway, unless someone tells me that these symptoms really could have been the result of problems in XFree86/Cygwin and that re-installation using Setup.exe over an older manual installation could lead to this, I'm assuming my XFree86/Cygwin installation is OK. I downloaded and installed all the XFree86/Cygwin packages, by the way. However, I'm loath to use XFree86 while this problem lurks. I have comprehensive daily backups and all, but tempting fate like this is not my idea of a thrill (that's what bicycling in urban traffic is for)... Randall Schulz Mountain View, CA USA At 14:31 2002-05-09, Matt Wilkie wrote: I haven't seen an answer to this one yet. Is that because no one knows? I'm in the same boat. -matt wilkie Randall R Schulz wrote: Hi, I installed XFree86/Cygwin via the semi-manual procedure that predates the release of Setup.exe packages. I want to know how I should handle switching over to the Setup.exe-based installation of XFree86/Cygwin. Should I just download the packages and install over the existing XFree86/Cygwin installation? (I always download binary source packages and then separately install only the binaries, keeping the sources in tarball form until I should happen to need them). If it matters, I've installed a couple of separate XFree86 software packages (XFig and the NCAR Graphics and NCL systems). The NCAR software installation isn't trivial, so if I could avoid having to redo it, that would be preferable. Thanks. Randall Schulz Mountain View, CA USA
[ANNOUNCEMENT] New Cygwin setup.exe package 'fvwm' available
The package should appear on mirrors within 24 hours. To get any functionality you'll want to change the 'run twm', 'start twm', or 'start /B twm' in startxwin.bat to the following (adjust the 'run' part to 'start' or 'start /B', according to whatever your existing line says: run fvwm2 -f /usr/share/fvwm/system.fvwm2rc-sample-95 That's it for now, Harold
RE: Best place for WindowMaker, Openbox, etc.?
Gerald, Hmm... the problem I'm running into with fvwm95 is that I can't do a build from a directory other than the source root, e.g.: cd fvwm95-2.0.43c/ mkdir build cd build ../configure make [tons 'o errors] I'm not an expert on autoconf etc. yet, but I just bought the GNU Autoconf, Automake and LibTool book this week for a project I'm doing at work, so I may be able to fix the config files for fvwm95 within a couple of weeks. For now I'm just going to set this package aside. Harold -Original Message- From: Gerald S. Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 1:42 PM To: Harold Hunt Subject: RE: Best place for WindowMaker, Openbox, etc.? I can do better than that. This -src.tar.bz2 file is nearly complete. It includes a patch file to restore the original distribution and a README for your use, both in the CYGWIN directory. You'd at least want to update the README for the general distribution. The original source is here: ftp://ftp.plig.org/pub/fvwm95/fvwm95-2.0.43c.tar.gz I didn't include a script to build it, although if you look in the CYGWIN directory of the sources for the SWIG package, there's a build.sh that you might find helpful. -Jerry -O Gerald S. Williams, 55A-134A-E : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] O- -O AGERE SYSTEMS, 6755 SNOWDRIFT RD : office:610-712-8661 O- -O ALLENTOWN, PA, USA 18106-9353: mobile:908-672-7592 O- -Original Message- From: Harold Hunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 10:30 AM To: Gerald S. Williams Subject: RE: Best place for WindowMaker, Openbox, etc.? Jerry, Send me the patches and I'll go ahead and make packages for it. Harold -Original Message- From: Gerald S. Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 9:26 AM To: Harold Hunt Subject: RE: Best place for WindowMaker, Openbox, etc.? I ported FVWM95 to Cygwin (it requires a few tweaks to three makefiles). I am not interested in becoming a maintainer for it, but you're welcome to the patches if you're interested. -Jerry -O Gerald S. Williams, 55A-134A-E : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] O- -O AGERE SYSTEMS, 6755 SNOWDRIFT RD : office:610-712-8661 O- -O ALLENTOWN, PA, USA 18106-9353: mobile:908-672-7592 O- -Original Message- From: Harold Hunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 5:08 PM To: cygx; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Best place for WindowMaker, Openbox, etc.? I've created Cygwin setup.exe packages for the X11 window managers WindowMaker and Openbox. I have tentatively put them in release/XFree86/WindowMaker and release/XFree86/openbox... is that a good idea? Or, should I give each X package a toplevel directory in release/? Harold
RE: Unable to get french keyboard with XDMCP connexion on AIX
Frederic, Well, after about a week of discussion on this topic I'd just like to summarize the project's standpoint on this issue: 1) We would love to have great internationalization support in Cygwin/XFree86. 2) No one currently on the project seems to have both the time and knowledge to provide such internationalization support (some have the time, others have the knowledge, but no one seems to have both :) Hmm... that's about it. I really wish that we had someone that understood everything about keymaps, codepages, layouts and all that, but we simply don't. Hopefully someone that is proficient in these areas will come along within the next few months. Harold -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of frederic bregier Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 2:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Unable to get french keyboard with XDMCP connexion on AIX Hi, I try to use Cygwin-Xfree to connect to an AIX system with a X11 client session. The connection works fine (with the -kb option as the FAQ said), but it is in english keyboard, and of course, I have a french one. So the question is : - is there a way to get a french keyboard without modifying the AIX server configuration itself ? (that is to say, only modifying local configuration inside Windows 2000) Note that if I connect in a xterm remote client with a X11 local interface (X11 running on my Windows 2000), I keep my french keyboard (I am using xmodmap locally, so it works), but with some strange behavior (for instance backspace seems to not work properly in the display but correctly in the result). I was wondering if there is a way to put the french keyboard in hard (compiled) in the XFree ? Note that a connexion with a commercial product in the same way (XDMCP client), I get correctly my french keyboard. Frédéric - http://www.WebMailSPro.com - VOTRE service d'email sans pub avec VOTRE nom de domaine
RE: Legacy Installation of XFree86/Cygwin vs. Setup.exe XFree86 Packages
Randall, theres nothing in X or Cygwin that could cause a CPU to disappear on you. Rob
RE: Legacy Installation of XFree86/Cygwin vs. Setup.exe XFree86 Packages
Robert, No, I really didn't think so, but I was hoping that if someone saw the symptoms and the specific graphics hardware I was using they might have a specific recommendation or some diagnostic information for me. And I assume that the _apparent_ loss of a CPU was not actually that, but rather the result of some stray reference clobbering a kernel data structure. Judging from the later symptoms, there was damage to some data structures that got written to disk, too. Randall Schulz Mountain View, CA USA At 20:07 2002-05-09, Robert Collins wrote: Randall, There's nothing in X or Cygwin that could cause a CPU to disappear on you. Rob
Re: Legacy Installation of XFree86/Cygwin vs. Setup.exe XFree86 Packages
Randall R Schulz wrote: More problem symptoms followed. When the boot process completed the hardware scan and got to the point where the Welcome to Windows 2000 low-resolution splash screen would be taken down and the monitor resolution switched, I instead got a long period of disk activity, which I took to be an automatically invoked file system check (I have all NTFS systems, so I'm not used to this happening and it alarmed me). There was no indication of what was happening (as their ordinarily would be for a checkdsk, either manually requested or automatically invoked). However, once that was done, the system booted normally. Nonetheless, I don't like things like this happening to my system. Actaully, I think the long delay was the copy-on-reboot stage of the cygwin upgrade. I vaguely remember something about XFree needing to update a LOT of in use files, so setup puts those files in the copy-on-reboot list. Fonts? Anyway, copying hundreds of files, one at a time, can take a while... We should probably warn people about this; they could really scrog their cygwin if they interrupt the copy-on-reboot. --Chuck
RE: Legacy Installation of XFree86/Cygwin vs. Setup.exe XFree86 Packages
-Original Message- From: Charles Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 2:09 PM Actaully, I think the long delay was the copy-on-reboot stage of the cygwin upgrade. I vaguely remember something about XFree needing to update a LOT of in use files, so setup puts those files in the copy-on-reboot list. Fonts? Anyway, copying hundreds of files, one at a time, can take a while... X appears to have a lot of read only files, which setup fails (don't know why) to delete, so falls back to copy-on-reboot replacement. Rob
RE: Legacy Installation of XFree86/Cygwin vs. Setup.exe XFree86 Packages
-Original Message- From: Randall R Schulz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 2:41 PM To: Charles Wilson Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Legacy Installation of XFree86/Cygwin vs. Setup.exe XFree86 Packages Charles, Wouldn't that copy-on-reboot processing wait until I logged in the first time? It happens before the GUI comes up. Rob
Re: Legacy Installation of XFree86/Cygwin vs. Setup.exe XFree86 Packages
Okay, thanks Harold (and the others who've chimed in in other messages). I'll let you know what happens. It will take awhile though, I have to go find someone with bandwidth and cdburner. :) cheers, -matt Harold Hunt wrote: No one knows. You can install with setup.exe over top of your last installation, but you need to install *at leat* the same packages that you installed manually, else you won't get updates for all XFree86 packages, and you won't be able to uninstall all packages with setup.exe. Other than that, I don't think it will cause big problems, but someone should test it out and report back to us. Harold
