Hi Bernd,
I think you are missing my point :)
I'm not talking about boinc.
I'm only talking about the example apps in sample directory
http://boinc.berkeley.edu/gitweb/?p=boinc-v2.git;a=tree;f=samples;h=3d82a4147a2770882369fb92849d209f85ba3347;hb=HEAD
so the boinc client and manager are not
So are you saying that we have to keep a code that fixed a 5 years ago problem?
http://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/ticket/725
No, if you really need sample apps you can create the link by yourself, I don't
see any point in breaking newer builds in favour of older ones.
even because I don't know who
I'm ccing Christian Beer, the original reporter, maybe he can explain more if
this code can be dropped or not.
(anyway I can drop the code only for debian, but I always prefer to fix
problems upstream rather than on debian/ubuntu/* only)
Bests!
G.
- Messaggio inoltrato -
Da:
Hi Alyssa
make[2]: Entering directory
`/build/buildd/boinc-7.2.0~nightly1~~git20130620+r19549/samples/sleeper'
g++
-g -O2 -fPIE -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -Wformat
-Wformat-security -Werror=format-security -Wall -g -I../.. -I../../lib
-I../../api -L../../api -L../../lib -L.
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 10:27:20AM +0100, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
[snip failed build log]
Yes, but what does that have to do with the commit you linked? Doesn't
it just add the symlink?
- Alyssa
___
boinc_dev mailing list
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 10:51:10AM +0100, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
Yes, but what does that have to do with the commit you linked? Doesn't
it just add the symlink?
I honestly don't know, linking it locally makes gcc (4.6) to fail the linking
of the file.
without the link gcc
- Messaggio originale -
Da: Alyssa Milburn amilb...@math.leidenuniv.nl
A: Gianfranco Costamagna costamagnagianfra...@yahoo.it
Cc: Bernd Machenschalk bernd.machensch...@aei.mpg.de;
boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu
Inviato: Lunedì 8 Luglio 2013 12:17
Oggetto: Re:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 11:31:31AM +0100, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/eglibc
the target is libc=2.15, nothing old at all.
Could anybody please point me an *actual* unix distro without libstc++
installed by default?
I would have assumed that you need
- Messaggio originale -
Da: Alyssa Milburn amilb...@math.leidenuniv.nl
A: Gianfranco Costamagna costamagnagianfra...@yahoo.it
Cc: Bernd Machenschalk bernd.machensch...@aei.mpg.de;
boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu
Inviato: Lunedì 8 Luglio 2013 12:39
Oggetto:
Hello,
Gesendet: Montag, 08. Juli 2013 um 12:53 Uhr
Von: Alyssa Milburn amilb...@math.leidenuniv.nl
An: Gianfranco Costamagna costamagnagianfra...@yahoo.it
Cc: boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu
Betreff: Re: [boinc_dev] boinc libstdc++ linking
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at
How about changing it to not throttle apps that use less than the current
throttling value? E.g. if throttling is set at .9, don't throttle a task that
uses .8.
-Original Message-
From: boinc_dev [mailto:boinc_dev-boun...@ssl.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of David
Anderson
Sent: Friday,
Hi David et all,
The following patch address many clang warnings.
Other people can see the patch here
http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-boinc/boinc.git;a=blob;f=debian/patches/more_clang_warnings.patch;h=56bb29543205bdb06e295f5bdc4d3e914dfb96dc;hb=HEAD
The patch is from Steffen Moeller.
What do we mean by 'use' a certain fraction of a CPU, anyway?
AFAIK, projects have a rather crude tool by which they declare what proportion
of an application's fpops are performed on the CPU - cpu_fracx/cpu_frac in
the xml format of the plan class definition - and nothing else. The *scheduled*
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 02:10:48PM +0200, Steffen Möller wrote:
So I think it's almost impossible to build compatible apps as a Debian
or Ubuntu package, unless I misunderstand something. It's an annoying
problem.
Redistributing binaries with a Debian/Ubuntu package? This is what
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 04:51:26PM +0100, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
-fscanf(f, %d, num_bits);
+int fs = fscanf(f, %d, num_bits);
+if (EOF == fs) return ERR_NULL;
key-bits = num_bits;
len = size - sizeof(key-bits);
for (i=0; ilen; i++) {
-fscanf(f, %2x,
Are these changes all thoroughly tested?
-- David
On 08-Jul-2013 8:51 AM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
Hi David et all,
The following patch address many clang warnings.
Other people can see the patch here
16 matches
Mail list logo
