Any idea what the author of libev is on about here (from
http://pod.tst.eu/http://cvs.schmorp.de/libev/ev.pod):
unsigned int ev_recommended_backends ()
Return the set of all backends compiled into this binary of libev
and also recommended for this platform. This set is often smaller
On 15/12/2007, James Mansion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|EVBACKEND_KQUEUE| (value 8, most BSD clones)
Kqueue deserves special mention, as at the time of this writing, it
was broken on all BSDs except NetBSD (usually it doesn't work with
anything but sockets and pipes, except on
On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 09:51:20AM +, James Mansion wrote:
Kqueue deserves special mention, as at the time of this writing, it
was broken on all BSDs except NetBSD (usually it doesn't work with
anything but sockets and pipes, except on Darwin, where of course
its completely
Actually, until recently it was broken on pipes. We've never received
any PRs to that effect so there is no way of knowing. You'll have
better luck asking the author himself.
-Kip
On 12/15/07, James Mansion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any idea what the author of libev is on about here (from
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 12:20:22PM +0300, Lenar Tukhvatullin wrote:
We are experiencing a problem with BCM5721 bge interfaces, which seems to
be able to receive at almost 1Gbps but can only transmit at 540Mbps.
Hello, can you test patch from Igor Sysoev with recommended tunables?
James Mansion wrote:
Any idea what the author of libev is on about here (from
http://pod.tst.eu/http://cvs.schmorp.de/libev/ev.pod):
unsigned int ev_recommended_backends ()
Return the set of all backends compiled into this binary of libev
and also recommended for this platform. This set
Julian Elischer wrote:
James Mansion wrote:
Any idea what the author of libev is on about here (from
http://pod.tst.eu/http://cvs.schmorp.de/libev/ev.pod):
unsigned int ev_recommended_backends ()
Return the set of all backends compiled into this binary of libev
and also recommended for
It looks like a decent library, but these comments seem unfortunate.
Does anyone know what the author is concerned about?
he's just plain misinformed
Until we know what he is referring to we can't actually say that.
-Kip
___
Alex Dupre wrote:
Chuck Robey wrote:
I guess I might be wrong, but I have to say, wrapping everything really
does seem to me to be the hack.
Call it a wrapper, call it a symlink, but it seems to me that you don't
like linux libs in LOCALBASE *and* you don't like executable references
in
9 matches
Mail list logo
