http://dast.nlanr.net/Features/Autobuf/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 03:06:08AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
Sequent had a BSD-based OS called Dynix, which had a lot
of smart things in it, including per processor resource
pools, which is what enabled it to scale so large: it
removed everything it could from the inter-CPU contention
-Original Message-
From: srinivasarao [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Peter Pentchev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, July 13, 2001 2:16 PM
Subject: help me
hi,
In FreeBSD i want to compile the module dev which should reflect the
kernel also, without
So I have stumbled across a linux emulation bug in freebsd. Below
is the program that returns different results based on FreeBSD,
Linux or Linux emulation under FreeBSD.
Running natively under FreeBSD:
x = 53.2785
exp(x) = 137581029243568449912832.
Running natively under Linux:
x
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 07/14/2001
at 11:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
So I have stumbled across a linux emulation bug in freebsd. Below is
the program that returns different results based on FreeBSD, Linux or
Linux emulation under FreeBSD.
Running natively under FreeBSD:
x =
On Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 11:09:22AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I have stumbled across a linux emulation bug in freebsd. Below
is the program that returns different results based on FreeBSD,
Linux or Linux emulation under FreeBSD.
...
Running natively under Linux:
x = 53.278500
The correct answer to the level of accuracy you quote is:
137581029243568295877658.36934931
Both are correct to about 15 sig figs, which is about what the precision
of IEEE double precision arithmetic is supposed to be.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I have stumbled across a linux emulation
On Saturday, July 14, 2001, at 11:19 AM, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 11:09:22AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I have stumbled across a linux emulation bug in freebsd. Below
is the program that returns different results based on FreeBSD,
Linux or Linux emulation under
On Saturday, July 14, 2001, at 11:17 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 07/14/2001
at 11:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
So I have stumbled across a linux emulation bug in freebsd. Below is
the program that returns different results based on FreeBSD, Linux or
Linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 07/14/2001
at 11:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Running natively under FreeBSD:
x = 53.2785
exp(x) = 137581029243568449912832.
Running natively under Linux:
x = 53.278500
exp(x) = 137581029243568449912832.00
On Saturday, July 14, 2001, at 11:23 AM, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
The correct answer to the level of accuracy you quote is:
137581029243568295877658.36934931
Both are correct to about 15 sig figs, which is about what the precision
of IEEE double precision arithmetic is supposed to
On Saturday, July 14, 2001, at 11:19 AM, David O'Brien wrote:
On Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 11:09:22AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I have stumbled across a linux emulation bug in freebsd. Below
is the program that returns different results based on FreeBSD,
Linux or Linux emulation under
Yes, I tried out the program
#include stdio.h
#include math.h
main() {
double x,y;
int i;
x = 53.278500;
y = exp(x);
printf(%8lf\n,x);
for(i=0;isizeof(double);i++)
printf(%x ,((unsigned char*)(x))[i]);
printf(\n);
printf(%8lf\n,y);
for(i=0;isizeof(double);i++)
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 07/14/2001
at 01:58 PM, Stephen Montgomery-Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Yes, I tried out the program
#include stdio.h
#include math.h
main() {
double x,y;
int i;
x = 53.278500;
y = exp(x);
printf(%8lf\n,x);
for(i=0;isizeof(double);i++)
printf(%x
On Saturday, July 14, 2001, at 11:58 AM, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Yes, I tried out the program
#include stdio.h
#include math.h
main() {
double x,y;
int i;
x = 53.278500;
y = exp(x);
printf(%8lf\n,x);
for(i=0;isizeof(double);i++)
printf(%x ,((unsigned
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also tried the same experiment with sin and gamma - then the problem
does not occur. Well except that the answer for gamma(53.278500) is
reported as 157.464664 which is way wrong.
When I tried it for x=52 they gave almost the same answer, only
seperated by
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
exp(54) = 160.331128 is way way wrong, by orders of magnitude.
Sorry - programming error - I forgot to change gamma back to exp.
--
Stephen Montgomery-Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.math.missouri.edu/~stephen
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Same for gamma(53.27850) = 157.464664.
Figured out this problem. gamma is returning the result of lgamma.
--
Stephen Montgomery-Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.math.missouri.edu/~stephen
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe
hi,
In FreeBSD i want to compile the module dev which should reflect the
kernel also, without compiling the kenel completely.
You can't do this.
and also i want to
include one more directory in /usr/src/sys/dev . so to compile that
directory files shall i have to made changes in
How do,
Something I've wanted for a while, and not found (and don't know enough
to write myself) is a description of the path an IP packet takes through
the kernel, and where things like ipfw, ipfilter, natd, ipdivert, and so
on, take effect.
Something like (and keep in mind I've got no idea
Ian == Ian Dowse [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ian In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], David
Ian Gilbert write s:
Is it not possible (or has nobody done it) to swap with the current
diskless boot?
Ian The patch (against RELENG_4) is below; I wonder should this just
Ian be committed? We have certainly
|- Message log follows: ---|
| no valid recipients were found for this message |
|--|
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] - unknown user
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: mail failed, returning to sender
Date: Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 04:10:41AM +0200
freebsd-hackers-digest Saturday, July 14 2001 Volume 05 : Number 180
Doesn't mail that failed to deliver get this poor guy unsubscribed
automagically, if it
So the solution to my problem was to set the __INITIAL_NPXCW__ to
0x37F. What I can think of is that the freebsd binary sets
the Control Word to this before running but the linux binary
does not (because it is assumed to already be set by the kernel
at boot time). So I would think the linux
Seems a reasonable thing to do - have you found where in the linux
compatability code one might set it?
From: Jim Pirzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: math library difference between linux emulation and native freebsd (and
native linux)
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 21:03:14 -0700
So the solution
On Saturday 14 July 2001 09:08 pm, you wrote:
Seems a reasonable thing to do - have you found where in the linux
compatability code one might set it?
I orginally though in the linux_sendsig routine, where the fpstate
structure is (there is even a int called 'cw'). I tried setting
it there
26 matches
Mail list logo
