On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:05:36PM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 04:18:16PM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 10:49:00AM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I could accept
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 04:18:16PM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 10:49:00AM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I could accept Brooks' solution, because it means gmond would only
fail for
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 10:49:00AM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 01:31:22PM -0600, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 04:56:51PM +, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 04:18:16PM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 10:49:00AM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I could accept Brooks' solution, because it means gmond would only
fail for something like out-of-memory, while any configuration
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 01:31:22PM -0600, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 04:56:51PM +, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
I presume the reason why you haven't seen this show up in the APR list, is
because it makes probably more sense
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 10:49:00AM +, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 01:31:22PM -0600, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 04:56:51PM +, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
I presume the reason why you haven't seen this
[Resend with correct sender address]
From: Brooks Davis bro...@freebsd.org
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 13:31:22 -0600
To: Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon care...@sajinet.com.pe
Cc: Brad Nicholes bnicho...@novell.com,
ganglia-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Ganglia-developers] [RFC
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 01:31:22PM -0600, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 04:56:51PM +, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
I presume the reason why you haven't seen this show up in the APR list, is
because it makes probably more sense for the apache httpd list instead for
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 09:40:53AM -0800, Bernard Li wrote:
Wow... what a long thread...
Sorry about that boss, but also sent an executive summary in :
http://www.mail-archive.com/ganglia-developers@lists.sourceforge.net/msg05398.html
Hope you don't mind reading instead that one or my
it replaces apr_proc_detach with an inline implementation of it on plain
POSIX and that should be most likely as portable (at least for the platforms
we care of) and doesn't intentionally include any error checking to make it
How about Cygwin and mingw? I'm not sure if the use of pipe(),
Brad Nicholes wrote:
On 12/11/2009 at 6:21 AM, in message 4b224750.2090...@pocock.com.au,
Daniel
Pocock dan...@pocock.com.au wrote:
it replaces apr_proc_detach with an inline implementation of it on plain
POSIX and that should be most likely as portable (at least for the
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 08:59:56AM -0700, Brad Nicholes wrote:
APR is designed to solve these problems in a cross platform way and we
are proposing that we abandon the cross platform solution in favor of a
platform specific solution.
Just want to clarify here that it is not a platform
Hi guys:
Wow... what a long thread...
IMHO, the best solution here is to look at apache's main loop
implementation and adapt our code. This way, (hopefully) we will get
what we want (late initialization) without modifying any apr code.
Carlo, since you seem to be on a roll here, could you
Greetings,
in case it wasn't obvious, and to celebrate the 1 week anniversary for this
email, RFC means Request for Comments, and so if you have any about the code
(which I even sent with an obvious bug to encourage the usual bikesheeding)
or design, a reply on it (better if to the original email
14 matches
Mail list logo
