Adam Leventhal wrote:
On Sat, Feb 02, 2008 at 10:03:33PM -0600, Mike Gerdts wrote:
My view of 6590548[1] says that it is closed as not a defect but does
not offer any clues as to why it is not a defect. Any chance of
getting this cleared up?
I'm not sure why we don't include the evaluation
Nicolas Williams writes:
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 05:44:05PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This pig isn't very attractive. Is a system call number shortage the
underlying problem? And is the fix to this ultimately about fixing the
syscall
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 05:44:05PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This pig isn't very attractive. Is a system call number shortage the
underlying problem? And is the fix to this ultimately about fixing
Hi Tiller,
Thanks for adding that information, but for future reference, the protocol is
to send out mail first to this discussion list with your proposed changes. We
just want to make sure the information is accurate before it hits the wiki.
Adam
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 11:00:37AM -0800,
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
unlink(2) and unlinkat(2) are different system calls. unlinkat(2) is
actually a
subcode (number 5) of the SYS_fsat system call. While it might be confusing
to u
sers, DTrace isn't going to slap lipstack on that particular pig.
[...]
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 01:34:02PM -0800, Adam Leventhal wrote:
I'm not sure why we don't include the evaluation in the public version, but
here it is:
---8---
Evaluation
[ahl 8.9.2007]
unlink(2) and unlinkat(2) are different system calls. unlinkat(2) is
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 05:44:05PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This pig isn't very attractive. Is a system call number shortage the
underlying problem? And is the fix to this ultimately about fixing the
syscall number shortage?
grouping
G'Day Vattini,
On Sat, Feb 02, 2008 at 10:35:47AM -0800, vattini giacomo wrote:
Is there a way under leopard to run dtrace with all is implementation about
networking,if yes how
and how is it possible to run,the Dtracetoolkit under leopard aswell?the
NET/* doesn't work at all
sudo
The problem is really in the distinction between section two of the
man pages (the historical system call interface) and the real
OpenSolaris system call interface that dtrace exposes as syscall.
Dtrace syscall isn't the same thing as man page section two, as the
former is an
On Feb 4, 2008, at 2:29 PM, Tiller Beauchamp wrote:
I have had trouble tracing applications in Leopard that have spaces
in the
name.
Actually you've escaped the spaces properly, but there's no module
named a.out in the Leopard runtime.
Try one of these instead:
% sudo dtrace -l -n
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 02:19:44PM -0800, Mike Pogue wrote:
From that original discussion thread:
Actually, there's no need to contact me or anyone: the wiki is open for all
registered users to modify. We'll tighted up security if we have any
problems.
Right: that was in response to
If there is a better place to report this please let me know.
When adding the inclusive method execution time it is required to use the
complete method signature. The problem is likely to be present in other scripts
but I've verified it in the Java related scripts that calculate inclusive and
12 matches
Mail list logo
