Hi there!
Since a cvsupdate and recompile some time ago, using ElectricFence with
pthread programs got impossible.
just linking the pthread lib and the efence lib to a simple small program
causes a weird error:
Fatal error 'Cannot create kernel pipe' at line ? in file
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-12 21:33:32 -0800:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:48:46PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-10 11:32:22 -0800:
To: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
you sent me a copy again, please, don't do it.
1. I
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-12 21:57:25 -0800:
David O'Brien wrote:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:48:46PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-10 11:32:22 -0800:
To: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
you sent me a copy again,
In the last episode (Jan 13), Roman Neuhauser said:
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-12 21:33:32 -0800:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:48:46PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-10 11:32:22 -0800:
To: Roman Neuhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-13 11:49:15 -0600:
In the last episode (Jan 13), Roman Neuhauser said:
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-12 21:33:32 -0800:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:48:46PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-01-10 11:32:22 -0800:
To: Roman Neuhauser
The fixit.flp from the 5.0 DP2 cdrom appears to be unusable. When I
attempt to use it after booting from kern.flp it comes up with errors of
the form:
fd0c: hard error reading fsbn 2528 of 2528-2530 (ST0 40abnrml \
ST1 4sec_not_fnd ST2 10wrong_cyl cyl 70 hd 0 sec 9)
accompanied by ominous
On 12-Jan-2003 Matthew Dillon wrote:
While working on an MFC I noticed that sys/compat/svr4/svr4_misc.c
(in CURRENT) is calling cpu_wait() in svr4_sys_waitsys() instead of
vm_waitproc(). I believe it needs to call vm_waitproc(). Can anyone
say for sure?
Also, in
REPOST, previous message may have failed to get through.
I put -z as an illegal option in /boot.config with the intention of
disabling autoboot. The prompt is now displayed, but it does not allow
any keyboard input and does not proceed any further.
(*** don't try this unless you have a way of
Roman Neuhauser wrote:
No, that's not the reason. I just don't like getting cc's.
That's easily fixed: I recommend /usr/ports/mail/procmail.
You can't expect people on a mailing list to tailor their MUA
configuration to suit your choices. It's up to you to set up your own
MUA and filters to
:
:
:On 12-Jan-2003 Matthew Dillon wrote:
: While working on an MFC I noticed that sys/compat/svr4/svr4_misc.c
: (in CURRENT) is calling cpu_wait() in svr4_sys_waitsys() instead of
: vm_waitproc(). I believe it needs to call vm_waitproc(). Can anyone
: say for sure?
:
:
On 13-Jan-2003 Matthew Dillon wrote:
:
:
:On 12-Jan-2003 Matthew Dillon wrote:
: While working on an MFC I noticed that sys/compat/svr4/svr4_misc.c
: (in CURRENT) is calling cpu_wait() in svr4_sys_waitsys() instead of
: vm_waitproc(). I believe it needs to call vm_waitproc(). Can
Hi freebsd-hackers list,
I'm new to this list, and first of all want to thank you all for such a nice
system, it's my primary OS (in combination with Mac OS X). Secondly: I have
sound card problems on my laptop (Celeron 850, bla bla bla). I get a strange
message when I start the system :
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dave Evans writes:
: REPOST, previous message may have failed to get through.
:
: I put -z as an illegal option in /boot.config with the intention of
: disabling autoboot. The prompt is now displayed, but it does not allow
: any keyboard input and does not proceed
Roman Neuhauser wrote:
No, that's not the reason. I just don't like getting cc's.
That's easily fixed: I recommend /usr/ports/mail/procmail.
You can't expect people on a mailing list to tailor their MUA
configuration to suit your choices. It's up to you to set up your own
MUA and
I'm interested in whether the following could be acomplished:
there's KLD module, installing some new syscalls in the kernel, as well as
installing new ``struct ipprotosw'' for some protocol or another(let's
assume IPPROTO_UDP).
Could we just add some code in the begging of the new protocol
Radoslav Vasilev wrote:
I'm interested in whether the following could be acomplished:
there's KLD module, installing some new syscalls in the kernel, as well as
installing new ``struct ipprotosw'' for some protocol or another(let's
assume IPPROTO_UDP).
Could we just add some code in the
It is not very simple. However Netgraph/ng_socket.c does something similar.
net_add_domain is called from ngs_mod_event().
However, it is not possible to remove this module because the feature to
remove a domain is missing.
switch (event) {
case MOD_LOAD:
/*
17 matches
Mail list logo
