I want to get started programming for hardware. Motors, sensors, actuators, etc.
I have a programming background, (python, PHP, C++) but no experience with code
that drives hardware. (Motors, sensors, etc.)
add -- to your language list so first 2 would disappear and third will
become C.
I
if you really need flash, you may install gnash from ports. not fully
capable but usually works, and doesn't need linux emulator and closed
source code.
Thanks for the advice about gnash! I've installed it, and removed
nspluginwrapper and all the linux stuff.
It seems to work perfectly for
On FreeBSD 8.3 I have apache22 web server with PHP. PHP is PHP52 for
compatibility with existing applications, but the most recent version
in the php52 branch
$ php --version
PHP 5.2.17 with Suhosin-Patch 0.9.7 (cli) (built: May 7 2012 08:45:58)
From time to time, I notice in a top output, that
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:26 AM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
i would recommend you to take more care about yourself, and not me.
You are not in the right position to give advice, young man.
--
chs,
___
On 21 jun. 2012, at 05:28, Waitman Gobble gobble...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Matthias Gamsjager
mgamsja...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Lynn Steven Killingsworth
blue.seahorse.syndic...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't seem to have generated much
On 21 Jun 2012, at 08:34, n dhert ndhert...@gmail.com wrote:
On FreeBSD 8.3 I have apache22 web server with PHP. PHP is PHP52 for
compatibility with existing applications, but the most recent version
in the php52 branch
$ php --version
PHP 5.2.17 with Suhosin-Patch 0.9.7 (cli) (built: May
n dhert wrote:
On FreeBSD 8.3 I have apache22 web server with PHP. PHP is PHP52 for
compatibility with existing applications, but the most recent version
in the php52 branch
$ php --version
PHP 5.2.17 with Suhosin-Patch 0.9.7 (cli) (built: May 7 2012 08:45:58)
From time to time, I notice
Le 21 juin 2012 à 03:52, kpn...@pobox.com a écrit :
All of this may seem stupid to a reasonable person outside of law. I'll agree
that it probably does look stupid. But it is also the reality of the legal
systems we must live with today.
I can only praise kpneal for this very well
I have one of these
http://www.nerdkits.com/
They pack everything you need in and a few examples, quite neat but
you need to do some electronics
On 21/06/2012, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
I want to get started programming for hardware. Motors, sensors,
actuators,
And I just want to add I'm a gay Marxist atheist and I represent the
accusations leveled in that other post...we have feelings too!!!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To
Snippet from Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl:
I successfully predicted the fall of linux (in quality point of view)
years ago, then netbsd - after this and my prediction were good.
Now i predict FreeBSD will fall within 2015 time frame.
What i mean fall - that it would be
from Stephen Cook scli...@gmail.com:
No, this is unusual. But also remember that most of these lists are not
just unmoderated but open to posting without subscription. Then it
becomes kind of amazing at how little flaming and trolling there is.
That's not an accident, the admins work hard
At 21:07 15/06/2012, Edward M wrote:
What do you mean by a decoder is needed?
A decorder is either a special plugin/codex that
gets installed into the OS ( codex called a52dec) and decoding
happens internally.
or a hardware device like a stereo receiver that is able to
for commercial sponsors of FreeBSD, it has zero bearing on FreeBSD itself. If
FreeBSD appears
as a subsidiary of some commercial company (say Juniper) i am not sure this
will be good
I think any project that size is actually a subsidiary and must be.
I just don't like that it isn't stated
force gcc build that MAYBE will work. possibly not.
My experience with NetBSD suggests you may be right there, but Linux?
After commercial support got too much about directing decisions, NetBSD
got very quickly useless.
I'll have to build a new Linux installation and see for myself!
Dear community
In the past, I built a 8TB ZFS log server on freebsd 7.4.
However, the system experienced instablility after long up times.
My main motive to use ZFS was UFS inability to support large
file systems.
Now, I want to the same thing on 8.3 and wanted to know
your opinion on ZFS
Because of FreeBSD lists being mainly unmoderated and open to posting without
subscription, I notice some outright spams that slip through the list filters.
I believe (could possibly be wrong) that the lists have spam filters in place.
it must have and well done. FreeBSD list is for sure more
Snippet from Antonio Olivares olivares14...@gmail.com:
I have some friends that develop software. They had released it under
GNU umbrella. Later on, other folks were taking advantage and not
giving back as the license requires. There was little to no way to
enforce the license, he decided
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
I'm quite new to FreeBSD too (RHEL/Fedora background), and am most
impressed with it so far.
rather huge difference.
Secondly (and probably stating the obvious), the handbook
wrong way to go. I can ask him for these and other reasons at your
request.
Yes, that would be a good idea, not so much for me as for others who want to
better understand the licensing issues of GCC compared to Clang.
i would like to hear this. but only in C compiler context.
i understand
Hi,
I think it is stable enough on FreeBSD.
Someone actually posted quite a similar thread not a while ago..
Here'e a quick summary:
For my various OpenSource projects, I have deployed a 36TB file system
which is fine and stable running 24/7. Additionally at home I use 4TB
(2x 2TB) + 8TB
stick with UFS. It JUST WORKS(R), and is trusty.
And it works fast.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
stick with UFS. It JUST WORKS(R), and is trusty.
And it works fast.
The correct answer would be. I depends on the work load
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
I will go with a single thread. I will also try to keep it as short
21.06.2012 15:52, Wojciech Puchar пишет:
stick with UFS. It JUST WORKS(R), and is trusty.
And it works fast.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
For my various OpenSource projects, I have deployed a 36TB file system
which is fine and stable running 24/7. Additionally at home I use 4TB
(2x 2TB) + 8TB (2x 4TB) on a machine with 4GB RAM this has been up
for 3 years with minimum reboot!
Good. There are some companies that make for
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
stick with UFS. It JUST WORKS(R), and is trusty.
And it works fast.
The correct answer would be. I depends on the work load
For different kinds of production workload it doesn't, aat least for me.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Hooman Fazaeli hoomanfaza...@gmail.comwrote:
Dear community
In the past, I built a 8TB ZFS log server on freebsd 7.4.
However, the system experienced instablility after long up times.
My main motive to use ZFS was UFS inability to support large
file
Fred Morcos writes:
q) Is it possible to run a FreeBSD system without much building?
In other words, can I survive by depending on packages and only
resorting to ports when really needed?
Mostly, yes. There are down-sides, but if you're building a
client where specific
On 21/06/2012 12:24, Fred Morcos wrote:
q) I am currently considering 3 disks for a home micro-server, with
ZFS striping with the third disk being a parity disk. In case I decide
to buy a fourth disk in the future and add it to the pool, is ZFS
capable of re-structuring the data on-the-fly to
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
For my various OpenSource projects, I have deployed a 36TB file system
which is fine and stable running 24/7. Additionally at home I use 4TB
(2x 2TB) + 8TB (2x 4TB) on a machine with 4GB RAM this has
+---+
|Stripe |
+---+---+
|Mirror1|Mirror2|
+---+---+---+---+
| Disk1 | Disk2 | Disk3 | Disk4 |
+---+---+---+---+
true.
but there are mirror/stripe layout that is quite
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 12:03 +0430, Hooman Fazaeli wrote:
Dear community
In the past, I built a 8TB ZFS log server on freebsd 7.4.
However, the system experienced instablility after long up times.
My main motive to use ZFS was UFS inability to support large
file systems.
Now, I want to
On 21.06.2012 07:39, Dennis Glatting wrote:
Stable? Yes. Be sure you have up-to-date FreeBSD kernel and your HBA
firmware is up-to-date. Generally I use LSI 9211 cards.
Does the 9211 support JBOD (complete plain disks, no RAID or single
disk RAID mess)?
Hi,
On Thursday 21 June 2012 18:24:26 Fred Morcos wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Wojciech Puchar
q) Is it possible to run a FreeBSD system without much building? In
other words, can I survive by depending on packages and only resorting
to ports when really needed?
you can run both
Maybe a hint. I leave always one big release out. With other words. If you
start now with 9, you do not have to move to 10 but you can stick with 9 until
11 comes out. You do not even have to upgrade at the spot.
my as i do - i for now run FreeBSD 8, and will run 9 when it will be
needed with
System 1: 32 cores, Interlagos, 64GB, 18TB RAIDz1
System 2: 64 cores, Interlagos, 128GB, 15TB RAIDz1
System 3: 8 cores, Bulldozer, 16GB, 27TB RAIDz2
what these systems do? (no details, just rough information)
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
How Can I simplify/perfect the following script, so that I read _ALL_ the
lines in the file and act on the content as shown below, so that I do not
have to specifiy an action per line?
This below is doing exactly what i need BUT reading one line at a time
untill the 10th line, if i want more i
I really want to see your face when you fsck 48TB w/o ffs+j (since that is
so young must be immature :S ) of data with the phone ring non stop with
Even if ZFS would be the only filesystem in existence i would make one per
2 disks (single mirror).
No matter what's going on, what do you
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
I really want to see your face when you fsck 48TB w/o ffs+j (since that is
so young must be immature :S ) of data with the phone ring non stop with
Even if ZFS would be the only filesystem in existence i
On 6/21/2012 4:22 PM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
stick with UFS. It JUST WORKS(R), and is trusty.
And it works fast.
What options are there for 2TB file systems with UFS?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
answer yourself.
Sorry but I don;t follow you right there. with 48 disks you would not mirror
24vs24.
if i wasn't clear enough then i would it like that (with UFS), and
assuming disks are named disk0disk48, and that i have at least one
more disk for system code, often acessed data etc
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012, Hooman Fazaeli wrote:
On 6/21/2012 4:22 PM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
stick with UFS. It JUST WORKS(R), and is trusty.
And it works fast.
What options are there for 2TB file systems with UFS?
the same as for 2TB filesystems.
One interesting feature of ZFS if it's block checksum: all reads and
writes include block checksum, so it can easily detect situations where,
for example, data is quietly corrupted by RAM.
This feature is very important for databases.
On 06/21/2012 15:58, Matthias Gamsjager wrote:
On Thu, Jun
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
answer yourself.
Sorry but I don;t follow you right there. with 48 disks you would not
mirror 24vs24.
if i wasn't clear enough then i would it like that (with UFS), and
assuming disks are named
On 06/21/2012 16:13, Hooman Fazaeli wrote:
On 6/21/2012 4:22 PM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
stick with UFS. It JUST WORKS(R), and is trusty.
And it works fast.
What options are there for 2TB file systems with UFS?
this should not be a problem if you use GPT + gpart (which is the way to
go
At 16:13 21/06/2012, you wrote:
On 6/21/2012 4:22 PM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
stick with UFS. It JUST WORKS(R), and is trusty.
And it works fast.
What options are there for 2TB file systems with UFS?
With UFS2 you can use file systems up to 2^73 (8 ZB). The problem is
not UFS, but the old
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 07:55 -0500, wel...@excelsusphoto.com wrote:
On 21.06.2012 07:39, Dennis Glatting wrote:
Stable? Yes. Be sure you have up-to-date FreeBSD kernel and your HBA
firmware is up-to-date. Generally I use LSI 9211 cards.
Does the 9211 support JBOD (complete plain
One interesting feature of ZFS if it's block checksum: all reads and writes
include block checksum, so it can easily detect situations where, for
example, data is quietly corrupted by RAM.
you may be shocked but you are sometimes wrong. i already demostrated it
and checksumming doesn't get
interesting idea but the options ZFS would give you are superior to this
setup.
Were you just unable to understand my setup or a reasons to do this?
please reread former post and possibly ask again if you don't understand
the reasons.
I ignore performance issues completely for now.
But
With UFS2 you can use file systems up to 2^73 (8 ZB). The problem is not UFS,
but the old tools used to format the disk like fdisk and bsdlabel. For big
file systems you must use gpart.
true. or not using anything at all (and put filesystem directly on whole
device/mirror).
The problem with
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
interesting idea but the options ZFS would give you are superior to this
setup.
Were you just unable to understand my setup or a reasons to do this?
please reread former post and possibly ask again
I do understand your setup but I dont have too agree that it is a good
so i would repeat my question.
Assume you have 48 disks, in mirrored configuration (24 mirrors) and 480
users with their data on them.
Your solution with ZFS - ZFS crashes or you get double disk failure.
Assuming the
On 21.06.2012 10:15, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
I do understand your setup but I dont have too agree that it is a
good
so i would repeat my question.
Assume you have 48 disks, in mirrored configuration (24 mirrors) and
480 users with their data on them.
Your solution with ZFS - ZFS crashes or
I think it is incorrect to assume that a failure with ZFS that cannot be
recovered could be recovered if you used UFS with fsck.
i think it is incorrect to not read carefully.
So explanation - ZFS failure NOT caused by disks failure cannot be usually
recovered.
But even if i am wrong at
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 10:42:55 -0500, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
And it is truly funny for me to know people do think this way.
If you understood how ZFS commits data to disk you'd not be making these
statements. Also, if you take snapshots you can just roll
On 21 jun. 2012, at 17:15, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
wrote:
I do understand your setup but I dont have too agree that it is a good
so i would repeat my question.
Assume you have 48 disks, in mirrored configuration (24 mirrors) and 480
users with their data on
Another important point:
With 24 ZFS mirrors you'd have your data being striped across ALL the
mirrors. This will yield much better performance.
i though already after few mails that you can discuss things normally.
But this reply just perfectly proves you didn't read more than maybe my
stupid answer to stupid question.
You never seen - but they do happens.
In other topic you hammerd on fact and if someone ask you to deliver them its
a stupid question.
just a proof it is a waste of time to explain things (FOR FREE) for people
like you.
You are free to make dangerous
Wojciech == Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl writes:
Wojciech I ignore performance issues completely for now.
An ironic line, given your complaints about clang.
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
mer...@stonehenge.com
On Jun 21, 2012, at 6:40 AM, Odhiambo Washington wrote:
How Can I simplify/perfect the following script, so that I read _ALL_ the
lines in the file and act on the content as shown below, so that I do not
have to specifiy an action per line?
This below is doing exactly what i need BUT
On 21 jun. 2012, at 18:07, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
wrote:
stupid answer to stupid question.
You never seen - but they do happens.
In other topic you hammerd on fact and if someone ask you to deliver them
its a stupid question.
just a proof it is a waste of time
On 2012-06-21 08:12, Евгений Лактанов wrote:
21.06.2012 15:52, Wojciech Puchar пишет:
stick with UFS. It JUST WORKS(R), and is trusty.
And it works fast.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
True but this applies as much to you. You think you know it all and that is
quite the probdlem with you.
And discussing with you is a true waste with this attittute. Even its free.
so stop it.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
his interactions on several topics.
ZFS is stable and tested, and works well if you have the resources. That
means RAM as well as hard disks - and if you don't have the resources, most
of ZFS's advantages wouldn't be coming into play anyway. I have seen no
right. repeat it more times, as
[...]
My one note to the above would be to advise against using it for swap
- unless you have enough RAM to make sure you never swap. It doesn't
do well in that role, in my experience. (Though that was under a
slightly earlier version.)
I remember on SXCE running on my test Sun E420r
On 6/21/12 1:40 AM, Michel Talon wrote:
Second, FreeBSD is not a commercial company, and while this argument may have a
merit
for commercial sponsors of FreeBSD, it has zero bearing on FreeBSD itself.
You seem to be unaware of what percentage of the development and
maintenance staff and the
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 13:24:26 +0200, Fred Morcos wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
I'm quite new to FreeBSD too (RHEL/Fedora background), and am most
impressed with it so far.
rather huge difference.
If you use the right
Good morning, FreeBSD enthusiasts. On my Hewlett-Packard xw4400 workstation, I
had one hard drive. I partitioned it with two slices, the first one for
FreeBSD 8.2 with its native file system, and the second one for a future
re-installation of Windows XP, to be formatted with NTFS file system.
ZFS is superior to UFS. End of the history.
There is no point in use old technology (UFS) when the new one can make the
same as the older and better ?
Regards,
El 21/06/12 11:31, Matthias Gamsjager escribió:
On 21 jun. 2012, at 18:07, Wojciech Puchar
Second, FreeBSD is not a commercial company, and while this argument may
have a merit
for commercial sponsors of FreeBSD, it has zero bearing on FreeBSD itself.
You seem to be unaware of what percentage of the development and maintenance
staff and the money to pay for them comes from those
I have an Intel Wifi Link 1000 BGN NIC that
I'm having trouble getting to work. I have
FreeBSD 8.3 installed. I looked in the NOTES file under
/usr/src/sys/conf
for the driver and did not see it listed. It is PCI.
I have tried to configure the settings
via the sysinstall command post
On 6/21/12 9:47 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
True but this applies as much to you. You think you know it all and
that is quite the probdlem with you.
And discussing with you is a true waste with this attittute. Even
its free.
so stop it.
This mailing list isn't your blog. If you want to
On 6/21/12 10:08 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
Second, FreeBSD is not a commercial company, and while this argument
may have a merit
for commercial sponsors of FreeBSD, it has zero bearing on FreeBSD
itself.
You seem to be unaware of what percentage of the development and
maintenance staff and
the experimental development branch -HEAD, it _might_ happen that
the system doesn't even compile, but updated 30 minutes after
that accident, it runs fine again. :-)
And finally unless doing tests or using private not-really-important
computer, don't just install newest FreeBSD because it's
ZFS is superior to UFS. End of the history.
There is no point in use old technology (UFS) when the new one can make the
same as the older and better ?
anyway there must be morons here like me that after observation conclude
that older is far safer and better.
But if you want end of history
We put clang because sponsors wanted it.
Sponsors didn't want clang. Sponsors wanted not to be encumbered by a GPLv3
they are not.
programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On 6/21/12 10:16 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
We put clang because sponsors wanted it.
Sponsors didn't want clang. Sponsors wanted not to be encumbered by a
GPLv3
they are not.
programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered.
Programs that link to GPLv3 libraries are encumbered.
On 06/21/2012 10:08, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
You seem to be unaware of what percentage of the development and
maintenance staff and the money to pay for them comes from those
commercial users. If FreeBSD cannot maintain the critical mass to
continue, it will not continue.
but why it isn't
On 06/21/2012 00:33, Hooman Fazaeli wrote:
Dear community
In the past, I built a 8TB ZFS log server on freebsd 7.4.
However, the system experienced instablility after long up times.
My main motive to use ZFS was UFS inability to support large
file systems.
Now, I want to the same thing on
Agreed. Wojciech Puchar is in my 'probable troll' file at this point,
Here too, http://berklix.com/~jhs/dots/.procmailrc.lists
Cheers,
Julian
--
Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com
Reply below not above, cumulative like a play script, indent with
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:16:31 -0500, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered.
This has not been decided in court yet.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
they are not.
programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered.
Programs that link to GPLv3 libraries are encumbered.
you mean libgcc_s.so.1 and libstdc++?
scanned /bin and /usr/bin and few programs do link it - all are C++
written.
None IMHO are needed in closed-source system
Because there's no reason to do that. It's an asinine suggestion.
Clang is here to stay. Most of us are happy about that decision. GCC
Because most that are not already stopped and ignored thing. and use GCC.
Politics won.
___
Hi,
On Thursday 21 June 2012 23:55:38 Polytropon wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 13:24:26 +0200, Fred Morcos wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Wojciech Puchar
q) Is it possible to get native resolution on the console? I played
with vesa and vidcontrol but could never get what I wanted.
z woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered.
This has not been decided in court yet.
sources please!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Agreed. Wojciech Puchar is in my 'probable troll' file at this point,
Here too, http://berklix.com/~jhs/dots/.procmailrc.lists
very good. just block me, instead of performing aggresive replies and
personal attacks.
___
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:30:40 -0500, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
z woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered.
This has not been decided in court yet.
sources please!
Google GPLv3 court case. There are no
sources please!
Google GPLv3 court case. There are no applicable results. Until a Judge
decides what the license truly means everyone using it is at risk.
true.
But why anyone from FreeBSD fundation didn't just write official letter
to GNU Free Software Foundation asking for just that
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:36:03 -0500, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
But why anyone from FreeBSD fundation didn't just write official letter
to GNU Free Software Foundation asking for just that case?
There needs to be a lawsuit and lawyers and judges need to be
On 06/21/2012 10:30, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
Because there's no reason to do that. It's an asinine suggestion.
Clang is here to stay. Most of us are happy about that decision. GCC
Because most that are not already stopped and ignored thing. and use GCC.
Politics won.
Excellent. We have a
On 6/21/12 10:36 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
sources please!
Google GPLv3 court case. There are no applicable results. Until a
Judge decides what the license truly means everyone using it is at risk.
true.
But why anyone from FreeBSD fundation didn't just write official
letter to GNU Free
Mark Felder schreef op 21-06-2012 19:28:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:16:31 -0500, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered.
This has not been decided in court yet.
Additionally, the exceptions for using the GCC runtime library
21.06.2012 21:32, Wojciech Puchar пишет:
Agreed. Wojciech Puchar is in my 'probable troll' file at this point,
Here too, http://berklix.com/~jhs/dots/.procmailrc.lists
very good. just block me, instead of performing aggresive replies and
personal attacks.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Only after you, my man, only after you.
not yours. i'm not
Additionally, the exceptions for using the GCC runtime library for non-GPL
executables
is limited to what hey call eligible compilation processes, what rules out
using
proprietary GCC plugins or other combinations of core GCC functionality with
non-GPL
tooling and extensions.
Please note
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Stas Verberkt lego...@legolasweb.nl wrote:
Mark Felder schreef op 21-06-2012 19:28:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:16:31 -0500, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered.
This has not been decided
So, has anyone compared the performance of clang vs gcc compiled in daily use--
for example as a server? Anyone can cherry pick a couple of binaries, but how
important is this for the performance of FreeBSD world?
not big, as with almost any compiler. Most workload are dominated by cache
On Jun 21, 2012 11:23 AM, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
wrote:
Additionally, the exceptions for using the GCC runtime library for
non-GPL executables
is limited to what hey call eligible compilation processes, what rules
out using
proprietary GCC plugins or other combinations
On 6/21/12 10:30 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
z woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered.
This has not been decided in court yet.
sources please!
Logical fallacy -- looking for a non-existence proof.
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
