In some email I received from Tim Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 3 Apr 2003
13:36:01
+1000, wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 01:36:41PM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> > Does -current coda really not build on 4-stable? I haven't rebuilt in
> > a while on my FreeBSD box, which is tracking 4-s
In some email I received from Jan Harkes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 4 Apr 2003
09:42:23
-0500, wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 11:47:25AM +0100, lou wrote:
> > hate to tell you guys but it`s broken on FreeBSD -current(however it
> > works fine on my -stable box)
Hoping someone could easily answer some newbie questions for me:
1. The docs seem to encourage using caches of only 600MB or less. Is
that just because it takes a while to prep a new cache or is there
some technical problem using a cache a full 2GB large?
2. Does coda have support f
Sorry about this question, I imagine I've just missed some obvious
pre-processor or makefile directive for this
It seems like Coda uses its own threads implemention as seen in
lib-src/mlwp/*. These files seem to be referenced as OLDLWP and there's
nothing more than a macro define that I can f
> . . .
> > 3. If coda supports bigger than 2GB caches, is the largest file size
> > always the size of the cache or is it limited to 32bits large or
> > something? Ie. is coda a 32 bit file system?
>
> Yes, Coda is still very 32-bit oriented. Even on a 64-bit processor,
> like the spa
Jan Harkes wrote:
> . . . As Coda caches whole files, it is not very useful to actually have
> larger than 2GB files because it takes a lot of time to fetch/store such
> a large file (I know networking is getting faster every day, but still).
> However, being able to run Coda on 64-bit architectu
"Green, Andrew" wrote:
> . . .
> I've followed most of the SGI/Irix news I've seen, and
> I just cannot jump to the apparent conclusion most
> people are reaching.
> . . .
> > I think it is very unlikely that we will have time to do this. Given the
> > dwindling support from SGI for IRIX I questi
"Green, Andrew" wrote:
> Not to start a debate, but heres another post to ponder:
>
> http://slashdot.org/features/99/09/02/1416237.shtml
>
> It does a fair amount of debunking of FUD and the like
> concerning SGI/Irix.
> . . .
I'm not going to bother CC'ing the rest of the list...
I just read
Lou Langholtz wrote:
> "Green, Andrew" wrote:
>
> > Not to start a debate, but heres another post to ponder:
> >
> > http://slashdot.org/features/99/09/02/1416237.shtml
> >
> > It does a fair amount of debunking of FUD and the like
> > concer
int
scandir(const char *dirname, struct dirent ***namelist,
int (*select)(struct dirent *),
int (*compar)(const void *, const void *));
Can I take away the "const" here?
---
Lou
available on FreeBSD.
---
Lou
> > count = scandir(".", &namelist, (int (*)(const dirent *)) xselect,
> > (int (*)(const void *, const void *)) compar);
>
> I hate casts, I wonder who came up with the bright idea to add all those
> casts here,
Do we need the following for building a CODA kernel?
pseudo-device vcoda 4 #coda minicache <-> venus comm.
"options CODA" is OK in compiling the kernel. Do I need both of them if I
am just running a CODA server?
---
Lou
On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Jan Harkes wrote:
ice vcoda 4"?
> The server doesn't need any special kernel support, it is a normal
> userspace daemon. Only Coda client need to hook into the VFS.
---
Lou
out of the box on FreeBSD 5. Part of this is
> due to gcc 3.2 being more picky about C++ code than 2.95.x.
Also, are the files under /usr/src/sys/coda being used for compiling the
coda kernel module? They seem very old to me. The coda.h says it is
release 3.1. So, I am wondering what the correct procedure of setting up a
coda client is.
---
Lou
stat.h in FBSD 5, the struct of stat has changed and
it no longer has st_qspare in it.
What can I do to get around with this?
Thanks,
---
Lou
15 matches
Mail list logo
