Re: [DNG] Popularity-contest for Devuan

>> > Don't know if this is related to the repo issues or something wrong this > end but I get the following from Cron Daemon > > Subject: Crontest -x /etc/cron.daily/popularity-contest > && > /etc/cron.daily/popularity-contest >

Re: [DNG] files.devuan.org not working

Do we know when this will be fixed? It's really hard to spread the gospel of Devuan if my disciples can't get to the source of enlightenment. Linux O'Beardly @LinuxOBeardly http://o.beard.ly linux.obear...@gmail.com On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Jaromil wrote: > > > ok I

Re: [DNG] Making sense of C pointer syntax.

Hendrik Boom writes: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 02:46:50PM +0100, Rainer Weikusat wrote: >> This is a wrong assumption and it relies on behaviour the C standard >> doesn't guarantee. Any pointer may be converted (it's even converted >> automatically as required) to a void *

Re: [DNG] Making sense of C pointer syntax.

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 02:46:50PM +0100, Rainer Weikusat wrote: > This is a wrong assumption and it relies on behaviour the C standard > doesn't guarantee. Any pointer may be converted (it's even converted > automatically as required) to a void * and back and > > "the result shall compare equal

[DNG] Networking, dependencies, restarting

Hi all, Right now, on the debian-user mailing list, they're wringing their hands about restarting the network and how Debian apparently gets it wrong, I guess because of stuff like you need a link before assigning an IP, you need an IP before doing DNS, you need DNS before NFS, Samba, Apache and

Re: [DNG] devuan installer main menu access

Boruch Baum writes: [...] > 4] The third set of downloads, for the additional system components, > should have been the easy lift. What I did was deselect the options for > a desktop and for a print server, expecting the system to want to > download ~273 files, as it did on

Re: [DNG] Making sense of C pointer syntax.

Steve Litt writes: > On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 13:57:08 -0300 > Emiliano Marini wrote: > >> char *p; >> p="01234"; /* skeezy, but makes the point */ >> >> Warning! Here "p" is pointing to nowhere, you don't know which memory >> locations are

Re: [DNG] Making sense of C pointer syntax.

Edward Bartolo writes: > Hi, > > Thanks for dedicating some of your time to answer me. I used: > > void change_value(void** ptr) > > Because I wanted to enable myself to allocate memory for the pointer > inside the function, therefore I needed a pointer to a pointer of type >

Re: [DNG] Making sense of C pointer syntax.

This is correct: int **L ===> Address1(preallocated) -> Address2(not allocated) -> > int (not allocated) > When you declare a variable, the compiler will reserve memory space to store it. No matter how may asterisks a variable has, from the compiler's view it's only a memory address. So

Re: [DNG] Making sense of C pointer syntax.

Hi, As far as I know, the compiler automatically allocates memory for the address where a pointer is saved. The unallocated part is the data attached to a pointer. What happens with a pointer to a pointer like void**? Does the compiler allocate memory for two addresses with the first one in the

Re: [DNG] devuan installer main menu access

On 03/29/2016 12:33 AM, Gregory Nowak wrote: > On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 06:30:42PM -0400, Boruch Baum wrote: >> 4.1] Was it a case of 'fat-fingerng'? I don't think so, but it's >> asking a lot to attempt to re-create this because with slow >> bandwidth, each install attempt takes a long time to get

Re: [DNG] Making sense of C pointer syntax.

Hi, Sometimes, a generic pointer is very useful. For instance, the Windows API documents functions that have untyped pointers. These allow great flexibility and behave like the variant type in other languages but with efficient memory consumption. Delphi Pascal has both the variant and untyped

Re: [DNG] Making sense of C pointer syntax.

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 09:55:08PM +0200, Edward Bartolo wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for dedicating some of your time to answer me. I used: > > void change_value(void** ptr) > > Because I wanted to enable myself to allocate memory for the pointer > inside the function, therefore I needed a pointer