On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
Hello Per , Has anyone gotten back to you on this subject ?
I as well am very interested in any information about releiving
this difficulty . Tia , JimL
Such a CD would be very nice; one or two people do have this
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
Hello James , Yup that works alright . But the difficulty
Per I were talking about is after the system (such as
slackware's live-fs) is -shutdown- the CD drive bay is still
locked , One has to hard-reset (or
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, bert hubert wrote:
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 11:52:22AM -0800, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
is there a more suitable mailing list for me to sign up for? debian has a
mailing list both for package maintainers and those who are trying to learn
how to be package maintainers.
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Sean Hunter wrote:
I propose
/proc/sys/kernel/im_too_lame_to_learn_how_to_use_the_most_basic_of_unix_tools_so_i_want_the_kernel_to_be_filled_with_crap_to_disguise_my_ineptitude
Any support?
Hrm - make it part of the "fscking_moron" subsystem.
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Andre Hedrick wrote:
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Jens Axboe wrote:
But I might want to do this (write sector 0), why would we want
to filter that? If someone a) uses an email client that will execute
java script code (or whatever) and b) runs that as root (which
he would
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
At 16:04 08/03/01, Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote:
My initial thought after seeing this article was that microsoft was testing
its waters on open sourcing. If i have 1500 licenses then i would get the
source. If i find any bug in thier source , i
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001, Stuart MacDonald wrote:
From: "Venkatesh Ramamurthy" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.zdnet.com/enterprise/stories/main/0,10228,2692987,00.html
"As such, clients will not be allowed to alter the code in any form and
may not give any other party access to any aspect of that
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Thomas Dodd wrote:
Andre Hedrick wrote:
From siliconvalley.com's GMSV column today:
self-destruct if it's tampered with. The utility is enabled
with 11 layers of security defenses, all of which must be
successfully navigated to disable the system. These
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000, Joseph Gooch wrote:
My RaptorNT 6.5 firewall rejects all connections from my linux box when ECN
is enabled. The error is attached. Perhaps this feature should be disabled
by default? Or is there already an option of the sort that i'm missing? I
only got the idea to
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, Andries Brouwer wrote:
On Sun, Nov 26, 2000 at 09:11:18AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
No information is lost.
Do I explain things so badly? Let me try again.
The difference between
static int a;
and
static int a = 0;
is the " = 0". The compiler may well
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, Tim Waugh wrote:
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 10:53:00PM +, James A Sutherland wrote:
Which is silly. The variable is explicitly defined to be zero
anyway, whether you put this in your code or not.
Why doesn't the compiler just leave out explicit zeros from
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Kurt Garloff wrote:
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:06:16PM -0600, --Damacus Porteng-- wrote:
Problem:
The problem lies with using my EIDE CDRW - I set it up properly using
IDE-SCSI. I can use my mp3tocdda shell script to encode mp3s to CD
(uses cdrecord as
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Andre Hedrick wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
You are wrong: If you modify the kernel you have to make it available for
anyone who wishes to use it; that's also in the GPL. You can't add stuff
No it isnt. Some people seem to think it is. You only
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Arnaud Installe wrote:
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 08:47:49AM -0600, Ray Bryant wrote:
The IBM implementations of the Java language use native threads --
the result is that every time you do a Java thread creation, you
end up with a new cloned process. Now this should be
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
* User continues to happily listen to radio through sound card
You're using the sound card without a driver?
Yes. The sound card allows itself to be unloaded when the pass-through mixer
levels are non-zero. This is
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2000 at 11:02:47AM +, Alan Cox wrote:
with the TCP ECN_ECHO and CWR flags set, to indicate
ECN-capability, then the sender should send its second
SYN packet without these flags set. This is because
Now
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
So autoload the module with a "dont_screw_with_mixer" option. When
the kernel first boots, initialise the mixer to suitable settings
(load the module with "do_screw_with_mixer" or whatever); thereafter,
the driver
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Irrelevant. The current mixer settings don't matter: what matters is
that the driver does not change them.
It does matter. The sound driver needs to be able to _read_ the current
levels.
So do so. That's a
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
[Chopped down Cc: list]
"James A. Sutherland" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
[...]
It does not know them. Correct. But with persistent module storage, it
_could_ know them.
No
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
So set them on startup. NOT when the driver is first loaded. Put it
in the rc.d scripts.
No. You should initialise the hardware completely when the driver is
reloaded. Although the expected case is that the levels
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Except this isn't possible with the hardware in question! If it were,
there would be no problem. In cases where the hardware doesn't support
the functionality userspace "needs", why put the kludge in the kernel?
If
On Tue, 07 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
changing settings. If I plug in a hotplug soundcard and load the driver, I do
NOT want the driver to decide to set some settings. If I want settings set,
I'll do it myself (or have a script to do it).
How about if your stuff is already nicely set up
On Tue, 07 Nov 2000, Gerhard Mack wrote:
On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, James A. Sutherland wrote:
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Gerhard Mack wrote:
Sure .. lets see you start a laptop in class or buisness meeting and have
everyone turn to look at you wondering why your laptop let off an ear
piercing
On Tue, 07 Nov 2000, Gerhard Mack wrote:
Then none of this is relevant to you, since you can't unload any modules! And
now you're the one doing the trolling... WTF do you think module code is
supposed to do when you don't use modules?!
Simple ... I'd rather the hardware was set to 0
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
"James A. Sutherland" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
[...]
The problem (AFAIU) is that if the levels aren't set on startup, they are
random in some cases.
So set them on startup. NOT when
On Tue, 07 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
When I plug it in and modprobe is triggered to load the driver, a script then
runs to feed the device appropriate configuration info. Since the driver only
resets the hardware when it is given the correct configuration, there's no
problem.
Thats
On Tue, 07 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
In the NIC example, I might well want the DHCP client to run whenever I
activate the card. Bringing the NIC up with the old configuration - which, with
dynamic IP addresses, could now include someone else's IP address! - is worse
than useless.
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
"Jeff V. Merkey" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
[...]
Your way out in the weeds. What started this thread was a customer who
ended up loading the wrong arch on a system and hanging. I have to
post a kernel RPM for our release, and it's onerous to
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, George Anzinger wrote:
But, here the customer did run the configure code (he said he did not
change anything). Isn't this where the machine should be diagnosed and
the right options chosen? Need a way to say it is a cross build, but
that shouldn't be too hard.
Why
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, George Anzinger wrote:
"James A. Sutherland" wrote:
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, George Anzinger wrote:
But, here the customer did run the configure code (he said he did not
change anything). Isn't this where the machine should be diagnosed and
the rig
On Thu, 09 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I think a default whereby the kernel built will run on any
Linux-capable machine of that architecture would be sensible - so if I
grab the 2.4.0t10 tarball and build it now, with no changes, I'll be
able to boot the
On Sat, 11 Nov 2000, Max Inux wrote:
gzip, actually. I can verify here "make bzImage" does the expected thing
and it looks normal-sized to me.
I believe there is zImage (gzip) and bzImage (bzip2). (Or is it compress
vs gzip, but then why bzImage vs gzImage?)
Neither. They are both
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
On Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 08:26:55PM +0100, Marc Lehmann wrote:
On Tue, Nov 07, 2000 at 04:03:25PM -0700, "Jeff V. Merkey"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marc Lehman verified that PII systems will generate tons of AGIs with
gcc.
It is a bit
On Sun, 19 Nov 2000, David Ford wrote:
My guess is that it's a plugin, the source for xmms doesn't have "cpuinfo" anywhere
in it.
-d
Gianluca Anzolin wrote:
it seems there has been a change in the format of the /proc/cpuinfo file: infact
'flags: ' became 'features: '
This
On Sun, 1 Jul 2001 20:19:07 -0500 Mon, 2 Jul 01 12:25:43 BST, you
wrote:
- Original Message -
From: William T Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 1 Jul 2001, Ben Ford wrote:
This seems to be meant as a joke, but I don't think it's all that
unlikely.
I seem to recall that MS products
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Dennis wrote:
At 07:01 PM 02/16/2001, Alan Olsen wrote:
On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Dennis wrote:
There is much truth to the concept, although Microsoft should not be ones
to comment on it as such.
What truth? I have seen more "innovation" in the Open Source movement
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Michael Bacarella wrote:
On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 02:38:29PM -0500, Dennis wrote:
It's not about facts, it's not about the truth, it's not about Jim
Allchin being an idiot or deluded. It's about propaganda,
misinformation, and marketing. It's about business. Nothing
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Patrick O'Rourke wrote:
Since the system will panic if the init process is chosen by
the OOM killer, the following patch prevents select_bad_process()
from picking init.
One question ... has the OOM killer ever selected init
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Guest section DW wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 08:48:54PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Patrick O'Rourke wrote:
Since the system will panic if the init process is chosen by
the OOM killer, the following patch prevents select_bad_process()
from
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
>
> Hello Per , Has anyone gotten back to you on this subject ?
> I as well am very interested in any information about releiving
> this difficulty . Tia , JimL
Such a CD would be very nice; one or two people do have this
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
>
> Hello James , Yup that works alright . But the difficulty
> Per & I were talking about is after the system (such as
> slackware's live-fs) is -shutdown- the CD drive bay is still
> locked , One has to hard-reset
On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, bert hubert wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 11:52:22AM -0800, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
>
> > is there a more suitable mailing list for me to sign up for? debian has a
> > mailing list both for package maintainers and those who are trying to learn
> > how to be package
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Sean Hunter wrote:
>
> I propose
>
>/proc/sys/kernel/im_too_lame_to_learn_how_to_use_the_most_basic_of_unix_tools_so_i_want_the_kernel_to_be_filled_with_crap_to_disguise_my_ineptitude
>
> Any support?
Hrm - make it part of the "fscking_moron" subsystem.
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> > But I might want to do this (write sector 0), why would we want
> > to filter that? If someone a) uses an email client that will execute
> > java script code (or whatever) and b) runs that as root (which
> >
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> At 16:04 08/03/01, Venkatesh Ramamurthy wrote:
> >My initial thought after seeing this article was that microsoft was testing
> >its waters on open sourcing. If i have 1500 licenses then i would get the
> >source. If i find any bug in thier source
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001, Stuart MacDonald wrote:
> From: "Venkatesh Ramamurthy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > http://www.zdnet.com/enterprise/stories/main/0,10228,2692987,00.html
>
> "As such, clients will not be allowed to alter the code in any form and
> may not give any other party access to any aspect
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Thomas Dodd wrote:
> Andre Hedrick wrote:
> > >From siliconvalley.com's GMSV column today:
> >self-destruct if it's tampered with. The utility is enabled
> >with 11 layers of security defenses, all of which must be
> >successfully navigated to disable the
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Patrick O'Rourke wrote:
>
> > Since the system will panic if the init process is chosen by
> > the OOM killer, the following patch prevents select_bad_process()
> > from picking init.
>
> One question ... has the OOM killer ever
On Sun, 1 Jul 2001 20:19:07 -0500 Mon, 2 Jul 01 12:25:43 BST, you
wrote:
>- Original Message -
>From: "William T Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> On Sun, 1 Jul 2001, Ben Ford wrote:
>>
>> > This seems to be meant as a joke, but I don't think it's all that
>unlikely.
>> >
>> > I seem to
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000, Joseph Gooch wrote:
> My RaptorNT 6.5 firewall rejects all connections from my linux box when ECN
> is enabled. The error is attached. Perhaps this feature should be disabled
> by default? Or is there already an option of the sort that i'm missing? I
> only got the idea
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, Andries Brouwer wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 26, 2000 at 09:11:18AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
>
> > No information is lost.
>
> Do I explain things so badly? Let me try again.
> The difference between
>
> static int a;
>
> and
>
> static int a = 0;
>
> is the " = 0". The
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, Tim Waugh wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 10:53:00PM +, James A Sutherland wrote:
>
> > Which is silly. The variable is explicitly defined to be zero
> > anyway, whether you put this in your code or not.
>
> Why doesn't the compiler ju
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Kurt Garloff wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:06:16PM -0600, --Damacus Porteng-- wrote:
> > Problem:
> > The problem lies with using my EIDE CDRW - I set it up properly using
> > IDE-SCSI. I can use my mp3tocdda shell script to encode mp3s to CD
> > (uses
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > > You are wrong: If you modify the kernel you have to make it available for
> > > anyone who wishes to use it; that's also in the GPL. You can't add stuff
> >
> > No it isnt. Some people seem to think it is.
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Arnaud Installe wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 08:47:49AM -0600, Ray Bryant wrote:
> > The IBM implementations of the Java language use native threads --
> > the result is that every time you do a Java thread creation, you
> > end up with a new cloned process. Now this
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > > * User continues to happily listen to radio through sound card
> > You're using the sound card without a driver?
>
> Yes. The sound card allows itself to be unloaded when the pass-through mixer
> levels are non-zero.
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 06, 2000 at 11:02:47AM +, Alan Cox wrote:
> > >with the TCP ECN_ECHO and CWR flags set, to indicate
> > >ECN-capability, then the sender should send its second
> > >SYN packet without these flags set. This is because
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > So autoload the module with a "dont_screw_with_mixer" option. When
> > the kernel first boots, initialise the mixer to suitable settings
> > (load the module with "do_screw_with_mixer" or whatever); thereafter,
> > the
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > Irrelevant. The current mixer settings don't matter: what matters is
> > that the driver does not change them.
>
> It does matter. The sound driver needs to be able to _read_ the current
> levels.
So do so. That's a
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
> [Chopped down Cc: list]
> "James A. Sutherland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > It does not know them. Correct. But with persiste
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > Yippee. As we all know, implementing GUI volume controls and putting
> > the slider in the right place is a kernel function, and nothing to do
> > with userspace...
>
> Don't troll, James. The kernel needs to provide the
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > So autoload the module with a "dont_screw_with_mixer" option. When the kernel
> > first boots, initialise the mixer to suitable settings (load the module with
> > "do_screw_with_mixer" or whatever); thereafter, the driver shouldn't change
> > the mixer
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > So set them on startup. NOT when the driver is first loaded. Put it
> > in the rc.d scripts.
>
> No. You should initialise the hardware completely when the driver is
> reloaded. Although the expected case is that the
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > Except this isn't possible with the hardware in question! If it were,
> > there would be no problem. In cases where the hardware doesn't support
> > the functionality userspace "needs", why put the kludge in the kernel?
>
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Dan Hollis wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Nov 2000, James A. Sutherland wrote:
> > So autoload the module with a "dont_screw_with_mixer" option. When the kernel
> > first boots, initialise the mixer to suitable settings (load the module with
> > &q
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Evan Jeffrey wrote:
> > On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > >
> > > No. You have to reset the hardware fully each time you load the module.
> > > Although you _expect_ it to be in the state in which you left it, you can't
> >
> > > be sure of that.
> >
> >
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Gerhard Mack wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Nov 2000, James A. Sutherland wrote:
>
> > Except this isn't possible with the hardware in question! If it were, there
> > would be no problem. In cases where the hardware doesn't support the
> > functionality us
On Tue, 07 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > changing settings. If I plug in a hotplug soundcard and load the driver, I do
> > NOT want the driver to decide to set some settings. If I want settings set,
> > I'll do it myself (or have a script to do it).
>
> How about if your stuff is already nicely
On Tue, 07 Nov 2000, Gerhard Mack wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, James A. Sutherland wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Gerhard Mack wrote:
> > > Sure .. lets see you start a laptop in class or buisness meeting and have
> > > everyone turn to look at you wondering
On Tue, 07 Nov 2000, Gerhard Mack wrote:
> > Then none of this is relevant to you, since you can't unload any modules! And
> > now you're the one doing the trolling... WTF do you think module code is
> > supposed to do when you don't use modules?!
> >
>
> Simple ... I'd rather the hardware was
On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
> "James A. Sutherland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > On Mon, 06 Nov 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > The problem (AFAIU) is that if the levels aren't set on startup, they are
> > >
On Tue, 07 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > When I plug it in and modprobe is triggered to load the driver, a script then
> > runs to feed the device appropriate configuration info. Since the driver only
> > resets the hardware when it is given the correct configuration, there's no
> > problem.
>
>
On Tue, 07 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > In the NIC example, I might well want the DHCP client to run whenever I
> > activate the card. Bringing the NIC up with the old configuration - which, with
> > dynamic IP addresses, could now include someone else's IP address! - is worse
> > than useless.
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
> "Jeff V. Merkey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> [...]
>
> > Your way out in the weeds. What started this thread was a customer who
> > ended up loading the wrong arch on a system and hanging. I have to
> > post a kernel RPM for our release, and
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, George Anzinger wrote:
> But, here the customer did run the configure code (he said he did not
> change anything). Isn't this where the machine should be diagnosed and
> the right options chosen? Need a way to say it is a cross build, but
> that shouldn't be too hard.
Why
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, George Anzinger wrote:
> "James A. Sutherland" wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, George Anzinger wrote:
> > > But, here the customer did run the configure code (he said he did not
> > > change anything). Isn't this where the mach
On Thu, 09 Nov 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > I think a default whereby the kernel built will run on any
> > Linux-capable machine of that architecture would be sensible - so if I
> > grab the 2.4.0t10 tarball and build it now, with no changes, I'll be
> > able to
On Sat, 11 Nov 2000, Max Inux wrote:
> >gzip, actually. I can verify here "make bzImage" does the expected thing
> >and it looks normal-sized to me.
>
> I believe there is zImage (gzip) and bzImage (bzip2). (Or is it compress
> vs gzip, but then why bzImage vs gzImage?)
Neither. They are both
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 08:26:55PM +0100, Marc Lehmann wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 07, 2000 at 04:03:25PM -0700, "Jeff V. Merkey"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Marc Lehman verified that PII systems will generate tons of AGIs with
> > > gcc.
> >
On Sun, 19 Nov 2000, David Ford wrote:
>
> My guess is that it's a plugin, the source for xmms doesn't have "cpuinfo" anywhere
>in it.
>
> -d
>
> Gianluca Anzolin wrote:
>
> > it seems there has been a change in the format of the /proc/cpuinfo file: infact
>'flags: ' became 'features: '
> >
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Dennis wrote:
> At 07:01 PM 02/16/2001, Alan Olsen wrote:
> >On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Dennis wrote:
> >
> > > There is much truth to the concept, although Microsoft should not be ones
> > > to comment on it as such.
> >
> >What truth? I have seen more "innovation" in the Open
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Michael Bacarella wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 02:38:29PM -0500, Dennis wrote:
> > >It's not about facts, it's not about the truth, it's not about Jim
> > >Allchin being an idiot or deluded. It's about propaganda,
> > >misinformation, and marketing. It's about business.
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Guest section DW wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 08:48:54PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Patrick O'Rourke wrote:
>
> > > Since the system will panic if the init process is chosen by
> > > the OOM killer, the following patch prevents
83 matches
Mail list logo
