Re: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh

2003-11-24 Thread David Leimbach
On Nov 24, 2003, at 8:09 PM, M. Warner Losh wrote: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Andrew Gallatin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : I'll bet a larger percentage of our users build ports than need nss or : ldap. I'll bet a larger percentage of the people are ignoring this thread than

Re: Re[2]: SiI3112 SATA controller problems - status

2003-10-01 Thread David Leimbach
Gabriel, Interesting, since no one's made any PATA drives that spin at 10,000 RPM as far as I know. For some reason I thought the interface change allowed for this (but couldn't come up with a good reason why it would make a difference). :) SS Hmm, PR? pricing? I guess its easier to make people

Re: SiI3112 SATA controller problems - status

2003-09-30 Thread David Leimbach
On Sep 30, 2003, at 3:30 PM, Soren Schmidt wrote: It seems Will Andrews wrote: On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 10:22:33PM +0200, Soren Schmidt wrote: No what I mean is that the Raptor is a PATA device fitted with a marvell PATA-SATA converter on board, its not a pure SATA design, but just the old stuff

Re: SiL3112 SATA (RAID) Controller drives aren't working at all.

2003-09-29 Thread David Leimbach
Hey Will and Soren! :) On Sep 29, 2003, at 2:38 PM, Will Andrews wrote: On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 09:13:48PM +0200, Soren Schmidt wrote: First off, there is ONLY support for Promise and HPT soft RAID in the ATA driver, other vendors products are *not* supported (yet). Second, there seem to be a

Re: SiL3112 SATA (RAID) Controller drives aren't working at all.

2003-09-29 Thread David Leimbach
On Sep 29, 2003, at 4:07 PM, Will Andrews wrote: On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 04:05:11PM -0500, David Leimbach wrote: I'd have to reboot and see how recent my FreeBSD stuff is... I have been rather distracted by the job which pays me salary :). If you can do that, I'll check out a copy of the kernel

Re: HFS+ driver kernel options?

2003-09-19 Thread David Leimbach
On Sep 19, 2003, at 5:45 AM, Terry Lambert wrote: David Leimbach wrote: Hey... just looking to see what option I need to enable to get HFS+ support... I am going to try experimenting with building a ppc cross-build environment and try to install FreeBSD on my iPod and boot from it :) (1) iPod's

Re: HFS+ driver kernel options?

2003-09-19 Thread David Leimbach
On Sep 19, 2003, at 1:55 AM, Christian Brueffer wrote: On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:22:37PM -0500, David Leimbach wrote: Hey... just looking to see what option I need to enable to get HFS+ support... All you need should be here: http://people.freebsd.org/~yar/hfs/ Doesn't compile under CURRENT

HFS+ driver kernel options?

2003-09-18 Thread David Leimbach
Hey... just looking to see what option I need to enable to get HFS+ support... I am going to try experimenting with building a ppc cross-build environment and try to install FreeBSD on my iPod and boot from it :) Dave ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing

Re: Question related to FreeBSD Serial Console...

2003-09-02 Thread David Leimbach
On Sep 1, 2003, at 6:36 PM, Nicole wrote: *SIGH* No what I want is NO serial console. DO NOT FOR ANY REASON turn off/not resp ond to the keyboard port -Dh means both keyboard and serial console... what's the problem? And please stop shouting. Dave Nicole On 01-Sep-03 Unnamed

Re: Question related to FreeBSD Serial Console...

2003-09-01 Thread David Leimbach
On Sep 1, 2003, at 2:47 PM, Scott M. Likens wrote: I have a question related to FreeBSD Serial console, I am aware you can use -Dh for both internal and serial, but is it possible to see the 'kernel' boot messages sent on both the serial and the console? If your BIOS supports serial port

Re: TESTERS WANTED for ATAng preview 1

2003-08-14 Thread David Leimbach
I am rather naive on the topic but don't many drives have a single drive jumper which works better than a master with no slave at times? On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 5:43 AM, Gavin Atkinson wrote: On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Soeren Schmidt wrote: It seems Gavin Atkinson wrote: ata1: spurious

Re: AW: new.h is missing

2003-07-29 Thread David Leimbach
On Tuesday, July 29, 2003, at 5:51AM, Kai Mosebach wrote: Tried that too, but wasnt working either. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/sapdb/src/FreeBSD/sys/src/SAPDB] # locate new|grep include /usr/include/c++/3.3/backward/new.h /usr/include/c++/3.3/new /usr/include/c++/3.3/new ought to be it. did you try

Re: questions on S-ATA and ICH5 (now owns hardware :)

2003-07-24 Thread David Leimbach
atapci1: Intel ICH5 SATA150 controller port 0xd000-0xd00f,0xcc00-0xcc03,0xc800-0xc807,0xc400-0xc403,0xc000-0xc007 irq 9 at device 31.2 on pci0 ... ata2: at 0xc000 on atapci1 ad4: success setting UDMA133 on Intel ICH5 chip ad4: ST3120023AS/3.01 ATA-6 disk at ata2-master ad4: 114473MB

Re: GCC 3.3.1, new warnings with limits

2003-07-14 Thread David Leimbach
On Monday, July 14, 2003, at 01:33PM, Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Leimbach wrote: This is a good policy in general, however, one could easily argue that what is trying to be determined with signedness and such being less-than-compared to 0 isn't really a big deal

Re: GCC 3.3.1, new warnings with limits

2003-07-13 Thread David Leimbach
On Saturday, July 12, 2003, at 11:05PM, Alexander Kabaev wrote: On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 23:13:12 -0400 Craig Rodrigues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am guessing that the C preprocessor does not think that it is in a system header, and thus prints out the warning. We specifically disable automatic

Re: GCC 3.3.1, new warnings with limits

2003-07-13 Thread David Leimbach
On Sunday, July 13, 2003, at 8:13AM, M. Warner Losh wrote: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig Rodrigues [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : I think that this is a FreeBSD issue. I compiled : the same file under Linux, with a GCC 3.3.1 checked out on 7/11 : and did not encounter this

Re: GCC 3.3.1, new warnings with limits

2003-07-13 Thread David Leimbach
On Sunday, July 13, 2003, at 1:11PM, M. Warner Losh wrote: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jilles Tjoelker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : The compiler moans about (T)(-1) = 0 as well. Is the assumption that : (unsigned type)(-1) is never zero valid? yes. There are no known machines where

Re: GCC 3.3.1, new warnings with limits

2003-07-13 Thread David Leimbach
On Sunday, July 13, 2003, at 1:23PM, M. Warner Losh wrote: : 134 #define __glibcpp_signed(T) ((T)(-1) 0) : #define __glibcpp_signed(T) (!((T)(-1) 0)) Why not the simpler: #define __glibcpp_signed(T) ((T)(-1) = 0) that way we have an overlap on the range of the two types, so

Re: GCC 3.3.1, new warnings with limits

2003-07-13 Thread David Leimbach
C doesn't require two's compliment, but it encourages it. If you take a signed value and convert it to the corresponding unsigned type , the result must be equal modulo 2^N to the original value (where N is the number of bits in the unsigned type. (Ignoring any padding bits.)) (Actually it is

Re: GCC 3.3.1, new warnings with limits

2003-07-12 Thread David Leimbach
Heh that's because the offending macro __glibcpp_digits calls __glibcpp_signed (T) on an unsigned type which does a compareison. std::numeric_limits signed long::digits on a 32bit FBSD will yield 31 because its got 31 bits for magnitude. Unfortunately the way it seems to go about calculating

Re: GCC 3.3.1, new warnings with limits

2003-07-12 Thread David Leimbach
Hi, I think that this is a FreeBSD issue. I compiled the same file under Linux, with a GCC 3.3.1 checked out on 7/11 and did not encounter this warning. I think you hit it on the head. I looked in the source code of gcc and found this: /usr/src/contrib/gcc/c-common.c 2597 case

Re: Silicon Image SiI 3112 Serial ATA controller support?

2003-07-06 Thread David Leimbach
Yeah... and it works wonderfully On Sunday, July 6, 2003, at 11:13AM, Arjan van Leeuwen wrote: On Sunday 06 July 2003 18:01, Soeren Schmidt wrote: It seems Arjan van Leeuwen wrote: (...) I committed support for that couple of days ago: ata-chipset.c: revision 1.32 date: 2003/07/02 10:50:44;

Re: Freebsd 4.7 to 5.1 buildworld failed! (fwd)

2003-07-03 Thread David Leimbach
What is the exact problem? I think I had an issue with one of the config utilities not running so I clobbered it and ran the one in /usr/src/usr.sbin/ manually and things started to work again. Did you have a different issue? Dave On Thursday, July 03, 2003, at 01:26PM, Nick Wood [EMAIL

Re: ftream errors under g++ 3.2.2

2003-06-29 Thread David Leimbach
On Sunday, June 29, 2003, at 1:19PM, Allan Bowhill wrote: I recently updated one of my machines to -current to adapt some code to build under the new version of gcc (3.2.2). However, file IO using fstream gives error messages about implicit typenames being deprecated, and I can't for the life

Re: ftream errors under g++ 3.2.2

2003-06-29 Thread David Leimbach
On Sunday, June 29, 2003, at 1:44PM, Jeffrey Hsu wrote: file IO using fstream gives error messages about implicit typenames being deprecated, and I can't for the life of me figure out what to do my code to make the compiler happy Change your /usr/include/g++/fstream as follows: Can someone commit

Re: HEADS UP: new KSE signal code

2003-06-28 Thread David Leimbach
I don't think you understand what I believe he was trying to say. Commits to CVS are NOT atomic therefore getting a copy of FBSD in between David's start and finish of commits would be broken. When he says he is finished.. I bet it will work again. Now if we were all using Perforce this would

Re: HEADS UP: new KSE signal code

2003-06-28 Thread David Leimbach
Because we aren't working on anything and need something to do... so we find ways to think about how we can enforce quality without understanding how stuff works first maybe? :) Just a guess. Dave On Saturday, June 28, 2003, at 02:20 PM, Julian Elischer wrote: he means that between the time

Re: HEADS UP: new KSE signal code

2003-06-28 Thread David Leimbach
On Saturday, June 28, 2003, at 3:18PM, David Schultz wrote: On Sat, Jun 28, 2003, David Leimbach wrote: Because we aren't working on anything and need something to do... so we find ways to think about how we can enforce quality without understanding how stuff works first maybe? Umm

Re: HEADS UP: new KSE signal code

2003-06-28 Thread David Leimbach
much [both of you: Xu and Schultz] Dave On Saturday, June 28, 2003, at 5:54PM, David Xu wrote: David Leimbach, Thank you for your reply and explain the reason for me, I normally won't reply such complain. At that time, I was very tire and sick, after one week of hardwork and sleep late at night

Re: Hyperthreading

2003-06-27 Thread David Leimbach
On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 05:46 PM, Doug White wrote: On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Glenn Johnson wrote: I have a P4 processor on order that will support hyperthreading. I was wondering what the general opinion is on enabling HTT for FreeBSD-5 (current). Thanks for any input. He didn't ask how...

Re: ReiserFS

2003-06-22 Thread David Leimbach
I certainly have heard of no such plans. FreeBSD 5 comes with UFS2 as the default filesystem and you can achieve many of the benefits of a journaling file system by enabling soft-updates. I believe the FreeBSD handbook has more on the topic and you can browse it online at

Question about developers handbook definition of encumbered.

2003-06-15 Thread David Leimbach
As I am slowly trying to get my feet wet with kernel programming I was browsing through the developers handbook. The following surprised me a bit: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/developers-handbook/ policies-encumbered.html So this claims that GNU licensing is *not*

Re: 5.1-RELEASE can't find SIL 0680 IDE controller

2003-06-12 Thread David Leimbach
On Thursday, June 12, 2003, at 06:15 PM, Mike Schreckengost wrote: Hello everyone, First off, let me express my appreciation for all of the hard work that has been put into the 5.1-RELEASE of FreeBSD. I have installed it, and am extremely happy with the way that it performs on my system.

Re: libevent for FreeBSD ?

2003-06-10 Thread David Leimbach
Interesting. I don't believe it needs to be in the source tree. I am not saying its bad code or isn't useful... I just don't understand what it has to do with FreeBSD. Does any of the other base code need this library? If so it would already be there wouldn't it? Dave On Tuesday, June 10,

Re: i386-undermydesk-freebsd?

2003-06-06 Thread David Leimbach
I thought it was the Monica Lewinsky edition of FreeBSD. On Thursday, June 5, 2003, at 07:20 PM, Mike Barcroft wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What does i386-undermydesk-freebsd refer to? What is it used for? Is there an i386-inthedrawer-freebsd, or i386-intheXbox-freebsd? As

interesting problem

2003-06-06 Thread David Leimbach
So... I have this nice SATA drive and controller which I believe is supported by FreeBSD but not in the default build for releases. What is the best way to cross-build a version of FreeBSD's release ISOs that will include drivers not included in the default distribution? Or is it possible to

Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

2003-05-28 Thread David Leimbach
On Wednesday, May 28, 2003, at 01:23 AM, Terry Lambert wrote: Q wrote: I have been burnt by this in the past also. I think that it would be useful if you could allow kernel modules to be bound to a particular kernel version/date/whatever, and have external modules refuse to load and/or complain

Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

2003-05-27 Thread David Leimbach
On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 10:40AM, Alexander Kabaev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 27 May 2003 10:32:42 -0500 David Leimbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ugh... the network driver portion of the nforce drivers is *not* GPL'd but it has a linux only and anti-reverse engineeing clause

Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

2003-05-27 Thread David Leimbach
. Well, network driver is a special case as it is this weird binary 'kernel' + OS shim combination which is getting popular lately. Have you thought about getting NVidia's permission to link non-GPLed shims with their binary object? I have thought about it... but don't know enough to pursue it

Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

2003-05-27 Thread David Leimbach
Remember that's it's legal to to distribute seperate binaries, as long as you comply with the GPL for the GPL'ed binary, but it's a violation of clause 6(b) of the GPL to combine them into one binary and distribute them, if you are legally obligated to not give out the source code for the

Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

2003-05-27 Thread David Leimbach
On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 01:40PM, David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 07:43:15AM -0500, David Leimbach wrote: However the idea is that all GPL infected stuff be isolated, allowing a fully working kernel without GPL stuff in there. Sounds like a kernel module

Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

2003-05-27 Thread David Leimbach
On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 01:40PM, David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 07:43:15AM -0500, David Leimbach wrote: However the idea is that all GPL infected stuff be isolated, allowing a fully working kernel without GPL stuff in there. Sounds like a kernel module

Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

2003-05-27 Thread David Leimbach
On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 01:40PM, David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 07:43:15AM -0500, David Leimbach wrote: However the idea is that all GPL infected stuff be isolated, allowing a fully working kernel without GPL stuff in there. Sounds like a kernel module

Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

2003-05-27 Thread David Leimbach
On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 01:40PM, David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 07:43:15AM -0500, David Leimbach wrote: However the idea is that all GPL infected stuff be isolated, allowing a fully working kernel without GPL stuff in there. Sounds like a kernel module

Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

2003-05-27 Thread David Leimbach
On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 01:40PM, David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 07:43:15AM -0500, David Leimbach wrote: However the idea is that all GPL infected stuff be isolated, allowing a fully working kernel without GPL stuff in there. Sounds like a kernel module

Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

2003-05-27 Thread David Leimbach
On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 01:40PM, David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 07:43:15AM -0500, David Leimbach wrote: However the idea is that all GPL infected stuff be isolated, allowing a fully working kernel without GPL stuff in there. Sounds like a kernel module

Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

2003-05-27 Thread David Leimbach
On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 01:40PM, David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 07:43:15AM -0500, David Leimbach wrote: However the idea is that all GPL infected stuff be isolated, allowing a fully working kernel without GPL stuff in there. Sounds like a kernel module

Just give me a good smack...

2003-05-27 Thread David Leimbach
I don't know what the hell happened but it won't happen again as I am now vowing to avoid using the Safari, .mac webmail combination. For some reason it kept coming back with no server response and giving me no confirmation that the mail was ever sent via webmail... I just retried a few times

Just building the lib part of world

2003-03-23 Thread David Leimbach
Or even better would be just building libc. I have been working on my getpwnam_r assignment... examining implementations in both Darwin and NetBSD and started trying to implement some of this code for FreeBSD... Its not anywhere even near the goal in sight as I am still learning the build

Re: Just building the lib part of world

2003-03-23 Thread David Leimbach
got a clear answer to that question either... basically I haven't made much progress due to being unclear on several of these little issues. Dave On Sunday, March 23, 2003, at 07:33 AM, Matthew Emmerton wrote: - Original Message - From: David Leimbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL

Re: Just building the lib part of world

2003-03-23 Thread David Leimbach
of these little issues. Dave On Sunday, March 23, 2003, at 07:33 AM, Matthew Emmerton wrote: - Original Message - From: David Leimbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 8:29 AM Subject: Just building the lib part of world Or even better would be just building libc. I

Re: Just building the lib part of world

2003-03-23 Thread David Leimbach
Thanks for all the helpful responses... :) On Sunday, March 23, 2003, at 01:38PM, M. Warner Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] David Leimbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : Or even better would be just building libc. I have been working on my : getpwnam_r

Re: IP over IEEE1394?

2003-03-05 Thread David Leimbach
Interesting... I didn't even know we had Ethernet over firewire :). Mac OS X and Windows XP both have IP over firewire either working or in the works and somewhat usable. The only one I can claim any experience with is Mac OS X. It's somewhat flaky though and you get unreliable spikes in

Re: IP over IEEE1394?

2003-03-05 Thread David Leimbach
programs to send data across the firewire to one another, you could use pppd through that tunnel. On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 08:25, David Leimbach wrote: Interesting... I didn't even know we had Ethernet over firewire :). Mac OS X and Windows XP both have IP over firewire either working or in the works

CVSROOT directory gone?

2003-03-05 Thread David Leimbach
I can't seem to get a mirror copy of the CVSROOT directory with my cvsup script. This worked fine a few days ago. cvsup2.FreeBSD.org is the server I used. Dave To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message

Re: IP over IEEE1394?

2003-03-05 Thread David Leimbach
for backup. I guess I can get some use out of my camera after all. Chris On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 09:21, David Leimbach wrote: Yeah... point to point connections are interesting and powerful but IP would be better if we could get it. I wish I knew more about how to implement it. :) Dave On Wednesday

Re: CVSROOT directory gone?

2003-03-05 Thread David Leimbach
but not RELENG_4 yet. Cheers, -Peter /snip /mich David Leimbach (leimy2k) writes: I can't seem to get a mirror copy of the CVSROOT directory with my cvsup script. This worked fine a few days ago. cvsup2.FreeBSD.org is the server I used. Dave To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: IP over IEEE1394?

2003-03-05 Thread David Leimbach
of more than 2 nodes? Or are you thinking of using multiple firewire interfaces per node? -Original Message- From: David Leimbach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 8:32 AM To: Christopher Fowler Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: IP over IEEE1394? True... I guess I

Re: IP over IEEE1394?

2003-03-05 Thread David Leimbach
public IP. However, The overhead could get you. I'm not sure you want to go down the writer of creating another interface. Maybe you could use the SLIP interface and capture that IP stuff and send across. On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 09:32, David Leimbach wrote: True... I guess I didn't state my case

Re: IP over IEEE1394?

2003-03-05 Thread David Leimbach
could use the firewall for heartbeat. People do clustering with fast ethernet all the time. ... I know because we sell a lot of it where I work :). Gigabit ethernet is better but switches are costly. Dave On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 09:32, David Leimbach wrote: True... I guess I didn't state my

Re: IP over IEEE1394?

2003-03-05 Thread David Leimbach
The interconnect is just 10% of the whole cluster story. Firewire is one possibility, but Fibrechannel you could do today if you wanted to. We have Fibrechannel support in the Qlogic isp(4) driver (thanks Matt!) today. Yeah... if you are lucky 10% :). In fact latency in messages isn't as

Re: Any ideas why we can't even boot a i386 ?

2003-02-27 Thread David Leimbach
I believe i386 compatible code was disabled in the kernel because it was hindering the performance of more advanced Intel based architectures. Supposedly you can build it back in but that would either require building a release yourself or finding someone who already built the i386 version.

Posix testsuites?

2003-02-17 Thread David Leimbach
I have been looking into helping with the C99 conformance stuff and I wondered if the following would be helpful? http://posixtest.sourceforge.net/ I am sure some of you knew about this... I guess I wonder if a link on the C99 web page is appropriate under resources and links. Also in my

error in nsdispatch.c

2003-02-11 Thread David Leimbach
There is a potential bug in src/lib/libc/net/nsdispatch.c in the function const ns_dbt * _nsdbtget(const char * name). The static variable static time_t confmod; is not initialized to anything. It may have some random value the first time this function is called and if you look at the program

Re: error in nsdispatch.c

2003-02-11 Thread David Leimbach
Bug? no. static variables are initialized with all-zeroes. Groovy... /me goes to buy electronic ANSI C standard :P Dave /fjoe To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message

Best method to produce patches?

2003-02-09 Thread David Leimbach
I am about to try to make some changes to FreeBSD current... Should I begin to use read-only CVS instead of CVSup for this work or is it possible to generate diffs based on CVSup'd sources? What is the recommend method to use for playing with the source? I already found a small change in libc

Re: printf....!

2003-02-08 Thread David Leimbach
Isn't it ultimately interrupt 08 on the PC with an index in the EAX register for the write subroutine? I am pretty sure that's correct. I might have the interrupt value wrong though. Dave On Saturday, February 8, 2003, at 04:12 PM, Auge Mike wrote: Hi all, I was trying to know how

Interested in helping the C99 integration project

2003-02-04 Thread David Leimbach
Hi, I am a software developer who has benefitted greatly from using FreeBSD the past few years as well as other software like KDE. I have been doing what I can here and there to make sure big projects like KDE will build and run on FreeBSD as well as other operating systems. I came to the

Re: Interested in helping the C99 integration project

2003-02-04 Thread David Leimbach
See http://www.freebsd.org/projects/c99/ Wes Peters has been assigned this task for a while. Perhaps you could co-ordinate with him. Yes and no offense to him... I am sure he is busy. Its not done yet :) I will contact him and see if I can lend a hand in any way. Thanks for the

Re: HEADS UP: GCC 3.2 in progress

2002-09-01 Thread David Leimbach
Hey lets find a way to keep this goddamned thread going.. huh can we... yeah... please... I love hitting delete!!! Keep it up and we'll be as cool as [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... /sarcasm On Sunday, September 1, 2002, at 07:12 PM, Matthew Jacob wrote: Matthew Jacob wrote: Yes, as best as I

Re: HEADS UP: GCC 3.2 in progress

2002-09-01 Thread David Leimbach
On Sunday, September 1, 2002, at 07:14 PM, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote: Of course. And being accused of 'trolling' is also a learning experience. I would have to agree with your sarcasm, seems like there is a big troll hunt and everyone is being accused. I wouldn't call it trolling but I

Re: BTX Loader issue with today current

2002-08-30 Thread David Leimbach
Make a GRUB floppy root (hd0,0,a) [first partition, first slice, first drive] kernel=/boot/loader boot have fun :) On Friday, Aug 30, 2002, at 11:33AM, David W. Chapman Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: GTX Loader 1.0 BTX Version 0.00 Error: Client format not supported Anyone have any

Re: gcc 3.1 / streambuf.h broken with using namespace std;

2002-08-27 Thread David Leimbach
sstream is the correct header. This is not a bug On Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 08:21 PM, Alexander Langer wrote: Thus spake Terry Lambert ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): What's going on wrong here? GCC 2.9x can compile this, 3.1 cannot: Delete and reinstall your header files. They must match the