On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:24:17AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> If you change it now, how many tools would break?
>
> Maybe if you can list what statistics you think should be common to all
> systems, that could be presented in another file that is always the same
> format on each
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:24:17AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
If you change it now, how many tools would break?
Maybe if you can list what statistics you think should be common to all
systems, that could be presented in another file that is always the same
format on each architecture.
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Nico Schottelius wrote:
Lee Revell [Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 04:42:12PM -0400]:
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 22:00 +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
Can you tell me which ones?
Multimedia apps like JACK and mplayer that use the TSC for high res
timing need to know the CPU speed, and
Lee Revell [Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 04:42:12PM -0400]:
> On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 22:00 +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
> > Can you tell me which ones?
> >
>
> Multimedia apps like JACK and mplayer that use the TSC for high res
> timing need to know the CPU speed, and /proc/cpuinfo is the fast way to
>
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 22:00 +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
> Can you tell me which ones?
>
Multimedia apps like JACK and mplayer that use the TSC for high res
timing need to know the CPU speed, and /proc/cpuinfo is the fast way to
get it.
Why don't you create sysfs entries instead? It would be
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 10:00:12PM +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
> Can you tell me which ones?
top for example would probably break. Maybe not but I suspect it would.
mplayer probably would since it uses it to find the cpu type and
features that cpu supports.
> And if there are really that
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 22:00:12 +0200
Nico Schottelius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can you tell me which ones?
glibc even parses /proc/cpuinfo, so by implication every
application
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL
Lee Revell [Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 03:17:00PM -0400]:
> On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 09:24 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 02:15:30PM +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
> > > When I wrote schwanz3(*) for fun, I noticed /proc/cpuinfo
> > > varies very much on different architectures.
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 09:24 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 02:15:30PM +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
> > When I wrote schwanz3(*) for fun, I noticed /proc/cpuinfo
> > varies very much on different architectures.
> >
> > Is it possible to make it look more identical (as
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 02:15:30PM +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
> When I wrote schwanz3(*) for fun, I noticed /proc/cpuinfo
> varies very much on different architectures.
>
> Is it possible to make it look more identical (as far as the different
> archs allow it)?
>
> So that one at least can
Hello!
When I wrote schwanz3(*) for fun, I noticed /proc/cpuinfo
varies very much on different architectures.
Is it possible to make it look more identical (as far as the different
archs allow it)?
So that one at least can count the cpus on every system the same way.
If so, who would the one I
Hello!
When I wrote schwanz3(*) for fun, I noticed /proc/cpuinfo
varies very much on different architectures.
Is it possible to make it look more identical (as far as the different
archs allow it)?
So that one at least can count the cpus on every system the same way.
If so, who would the one I
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 02:15:30PM +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
When I wrote schwanz3(*) for fun, I noticed /proc/cpuinfo
varies very much on different architectures.
Is it possible to make it look more identical (as far as the different
archs allow it)?
So that one at least can count
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 09:24 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 02:15:30PM +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
When I wrote schwanz3(*) for fun, I noticed /proc/cpuinfo
varies very much on different architectures.
Is it possible to make it look more identical (as far as the
Lee Revell [Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 03:17:00PM -0400]:
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 09:24 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 02:15:30PM +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
When I wrote schwanz3(*) for fun, I noticed /proc/cpuinfo
varies very much on different architectures.
Is
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 22:00:12 +0200
Nico Schottelius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you tell me which ones?
glibc even parses /proc/cpuinfo, so by implication every
application
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 10:00:12PM +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
Can you tell me which ones?
top for example would probably break. Maybe not but I suspect it would.
mplayer probably would since it uses it to find the cpu type and
features that cpu supports.
And if there are really that many
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 22:00 +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
Can you tell me which ones?
Multimedia apps like JACK and mplayer that use the TSC for high res
timing need to know the CPU speed, and /proc/cpuinfo is the fast way to
get it.
Why don't you create sysfs entries instead? It would be
Lee Revell [Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 04:42:12PM -0400]:
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 22:00 +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
Can you tell me which ones?
Multimedia apps like JACK and mplayer that use the TSC for high res
timing need to know the CPU speed, and /proc/cpuinfo is the fast way to
get it.
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Nico Schottelius wrote:
Lee Revell [Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 04:42:12PM -0400]:
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 22:00 +0200, Nico Schottelius wrote:
Can you tell me which ones?
Multimedia apps like JACK and mplayer that use the TSC for high res
timing need to know the CPU speed, and
20 matches
Mail list logo
