For all that weren't aware, and haven't been to the GNHLUG website lately,
tonight's meeting with Ximian was postponed until 10 July 2002.
Sorry if this wasn't more widely broadcast, I could've sworn I sent
out an e-mail.
Apologies for the ridiculously late announcement.
--
Seeya,
Paul
---
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, at 3:46pm, Ganesan M wrote:
> Is there a meeting today?
The meeting originally scheduled for Wed 26 June 2002 has been reschedule
for 10 July 2002. The calendar at
http://www.gnhlug.org/lug_cal/month.php?date=20020701
has been updated to reflect this.
--
Ben Sc
In a message dated: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:46:48 EDT
"Ganesan M" said:
>Is there a meeting today?
>
>Please confirm.
No, it's been postponed until 10 July.
I thought a message was sent out to the -announce list, guess not.
Sorry.
--
Seeya,
Paul
It may look like I'm just sitting he
Is there a meeting today?
Please confirm.
Thanks.
Ganesan.
> > Who: All GNHLUG members, the general public, and anyone else who
> > wants to come along.
> >
> > What: 2nd Quarterly meeting
> >
> > When: 19:30ish, 26 June 2002
> >
> > Where: Daniel Webster College
> > 20 University Drive
> > Nas
>Would you agree that this is not necessarily the case,
>if you can add a general-purpose CPU that the OS
>can allocate to that task, and doing so could have
>no marginal cost?
Maybe in some very unusual cases (development?
proof-of-concept?) but in general if you've got
a system to which you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, Michael O'Donnell hath spake thusly:
> these days the boundary between the two is blurrier
> than ever) but in commodity systems I assume you'd
> agree that modems, NICs, SCSI adapters, etc are all
> examples where the correspo
On Wednesday 26 June 2002 h:57, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
> Tom Rauschenbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wednesday 26 June 2002 h:43, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
> > > You know, of course, that most debuggers allow you to catch reads and
> > > writes to a certain memory location already, right?
>
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, at 10:01am, Michael O'Donnell wrote:
> However, this is activity that all modern processors are already engaged
> in for the purposes of cache management and such (Dcache, Icache, TLB,
> etc) so rigging these subsystems to generate an exception whenever a
> (relatively cheap,
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, at 10:43am, Rich Cloutier wrote:
> Then you have never been confronted with the "blank stare of death."
Sure have. But the thing is, I can keep that manager busy and not doing
anything else until I get service. Eventually, they give. It's cheaper to
give me a refund than
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Greater NH Linux Users' Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 8:31 AM
Subject: Re: OT - Where would you buy stuff?
> On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, at 12:27pm, Rich C wrote:
> >> I'm not overly fond of Best Buy, but they do of
On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 01:02:51PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> If you had the choice between buying off the web or from the local
> BestBuy for a slightly higher price, what would you do?
>
General opinions:
I like browsing. A small thumbnail of a $500 product isn't going
>Well, I suppose it depends on the implementation.
>My understanding of low-level hardware design stops at
>the "basic theory" point, and not much of that. But I am
>curious: How does the hardware "watch" a memory location
>without incurring any overhead? It would seem to me that
>there must b
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, at 9:19am, Michael O'Donnell wrote:
>> People make such a huge deal about something being implemented in
>> "hardware" vs "software". In most cases, the only difference
>> between them is that hardware is harder to change.
>
> In this watchpoint case I fail to see how the HW
This is getting *really* off-topic, but what the heck...
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, at 8:39am, Ben Boulanger wrote:
>> Being able to physically go somewhere, see a manager, and tie him or her up
>> with your problem until it is solved is worlds better than a phone call.
>
> So then web vendors need
On 26 Jun 2002, at 9:28am, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
> The hardware *does not* run in the following way:
>
> again:
> is the PC (program counter) at a breakpoint? if so,
> run the instruction at the PC
> goto again;
That was actually my point. The OP complained about the debugger ha
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Hardware implementation has a cost, too. You complain that debuggers use
> special instructions or more memory to do what they do. What do you think
> the hardware is going to do? For breakpoints, the hardware would have to
> keep track of your breakpoint list, a
>> You know, of course, that most debuggers allow you to catch reads
>> and writes to a certain memory location already, right?
>
> Sure, but they usually do it by inserting an illegal instruction
> at the beginning of each statement boundary ... hardware support
> for debuggers would be hard
Variable page sizes is a fairly recent feature found in some commercial
systems. Several commercial UNIX systems support multiple page sizes. The
page size if a function of both the operating system as well as the
hardware. Some systems (HP-UX for instance) also have features which may
treat m
Tom Rauschenbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wednesday 26 June 2002 h:43, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
> > You know, of course, that most debuggers allow you to catch reads and
> > writes to a certain memory location already, right?
>
> Sure, but they usually do it by inserting an illegal instru
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, at 8:05am, Tom Rauschenbach wrote:
>> You know, of course, that most debuggers allow you to catch reads and
>> writes to a certain memory location already, right?
>
> Sure, but they usually do it by inserting an illegal instruction at the
> beginning of each statement boundar
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Which can also be done effectively by phone, especially if you use their
> > toll free ordering line to complain.
>
> This I disagree with. Your call costs them next to nothing. They can put
> you on hold endlessly, leave you in voicemail limbo
On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, at 12:27pm, Rich C wrote:
>> I'm not overly fond of Best Buy, but they do offer the convience of
>> being local, which provides me the ability to go and beat someone
>> over the head should I need to :)
>
> Which can also be done effectively by phone, especially if you use th
On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, at 1:02pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If you had the choice between buying off the web or from the local BestBuy
> for a slightly higher price, what would you do?
I would research the web vendor to find out their past history and
expected longevity. I would seek opinions f
On Wednesday 26 June 2002 h:43, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
> Tom Rauschenbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'd really like to see the ability to have *tiny* pages to give extra
> > hardware support to debuggers. Imagine getting an interupt when a
> > certain variable is changed
>
> You know, of cou
Tom Rauschenbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd really like to see the ability to have *tiny* pages to give extra
> hardware support to debuggers. Imagine getting an interupt when a certain
> variable is changed
You know, of course, that most debuggers allow you to catch reads and
writes
25 matches
Mail list logo
