On Wed, 2005-Dec-14 01:05:45 +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Tuesday 13 December 2005 20:48, John Baldwin wrote:
Honestly, I think I've now been scarred for life. :-/ I think that this
stuff would be so obscure that no one else would be able to help with
maintenace.
I tend to agree.
On Thursday 15 December 2005 10:30, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On Wed, 2005-Dec-14 01:05:45 +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Tuesday 13 December 2005 20:48, John Baldwin wrote:
Honestly, I think I've now been scarred for life. :-/ I think that this
stuff would be so obscure that no one else
On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 22:38 +0800, prime wrote:
On 12/14/05, Joel Dahl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2005-12-13 at 22:44 +0800, prime wrote:
hi hackers,
Are there anybody are interested in project Usable lock implementation
with
I haven't any ideas yet. Have same on i7325 chipset on 5.4 stable.
Best regards,
Konstantin Prokazoff
Center Of Excellence, S_V_R Ltd., Kyiv HQs, Ukraine
Official business-partner DevConnect member of Avaya Inc.
Regional development support center of Digium Inc.
Tel. +38 044 594 1781,
hi hackers,
I want to use turnstile to implement sx_lock( or read/write lock),but
find that there is a big obstacle,
ONE sx_lock needs TWO queues to put waiters on,one for readers and the
other one for writers,but ONE turnstile can only supply ONE queue,and ONE
sx_lock can only get ONE turnstile.
On Thursday 15 December 2005 09:52 am, prime wrote:
hi hackers,
I want to use turnstile to implement sx_lock( or read/write lock),but
find that there is a big obstacle,
ONE sx_lock needs TWO queues to put waiters on,one for readers and the
other one for writers,but ONE turnstile can only
Please, forgive me for posting this here but I am trying to shoot on every
direction to see if
someone can give me any clues or directions on what´s going on here
I am a true FreeBSDer but this is a system that was dumped right on my lap,
with this problem to be solved.
Again, sorry for this
(discussed task was picked from Poul-Henning Kamp's TODO list)
Hackers,
I've implemented abort2() system call. Works just like abort(3), but
delivers signal reliably. Here is a prototype:
abort2(const char *why, int nargs, void **args);
why is reason of program abort, nargs is number of
Wojciech A. Koszek wrote:
[...]
Comments are welcome!
As for the patch, the use of do {} while(0) instead of goto looks odd to me.
I would like to comment on FreeBSD style(9) a bit. Why does not mention
or even encourage C99 style // comments? They are nice when one wants to
comment out bigger
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 12:17:14AM +0100, Václav Haisman wrote:
I would like to comment on FreeBSD style(9) a bit. Why does not mention
or even encourage C99 style // comments? They are nice when one wants to
comment out bigger chunks of code with /**/ comment.
Use #if 0 ... #endif for that.
I would like to comment on FreeBSD style(9) a bit. Why does not mention
or even encourage C99 style // comments? They are nice when one wants to
comment out bigger chunks of code with /**/ comment.
Too new. /**/ comment out is bogus anyway. #if 0 ... #endif is better.
On the similar note,
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Warner Losh writes:
On the similar note, the ability to move declarations closer to the
point of use in code is IMO nice feature, too. The style(9) doesn't
mention this either.
C doesn't allow it, or didn't until recently. That style tends to
lead to really
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 12:17:14AM +0100, Václav Haisman wrote:
I would like to comment on FreeBSD style(9) a bit. Why does not mention
or even encourage C99 style // comments? They are nice when one wants to
comment out bigger chunks of code with /**/ comment.
Use
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Warner Losh writes:
On the similar note, the ability to move declarations closer to the
point of use in code is IMO nice feature, too. The style(9) doesn't
mention this either.
C doesn't allow it, or didn't until recently. That style
Also, it tends to make it harder to judge the amount of stackspace
a function uses, something which is not entirely uninteresting in
kernel programming.
While it might be harder to get estimate of stack space allocation I
suspect it could actually lower the allocation.
Maybe, maybe not.
Hello,
I have installed Mathematica (v5.2) on FreeBSD 5-stable. All works
fine. I am now trying to get the Python bindings to MathLink to
work. I can build ok but it links against the Mathematica library (ML)
which is linux. When I import mathlink I get undefined symbol stdout
message (stdout
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tony Maher [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
I have installed Mathematica (v5.2) on FreeBSD 5-stable. All works
fine.
Is this a Linux binary, or a FreeBSD one?
I am now trying to get the Python bindings to MathLink to
work. I can build ok but it links against the Mathematica
Hello Mike
Mike Meyer wrote:
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tony Maher [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
I have installed Mathematica (v5.2) on FreeBSD 5-stable. All works
fine.
Is this a Linux binary, or a FreeBSD one?
Linux. I do not believe there is a FreeBSD one.
Then import fails with segmentation
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 12:17:14AM +0100, Václav Haisman wrote:
Wojciech A. Koszek wrote:
[...]
Comments are welcome!
As for the patch, the use of do {} while(0) instead of goto looks odd to me.
This can be changed easily in final version of the patch if needed.
I would like to comment
Guys,
With code freeze for 6.1 about 6 weeks away, I'd like to put out my
'wish list' for it:
1. working kbdmux. We need this for the growing number of systems that
assume that USB is the primary keyboard. Current status appears to be
that the kbdmux driver breaks very easily. We need
Is there anyone who can explain me, why when i say 'kill -HUP id', and its
failed to restart, kill say nothing?
It is such an easy to implement...
Roman Gorohov. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
21 matches
Mail list logo
