If I do the dd line in the title under 2.4.0 I get an
out.txt file of 591 bytes.
If I do the same thing from /dev/zero, I get the
expected 1,000,000 byte file.
I've shoehorned 2.4.0 into a fresh red hat 7.0 install
which could quite easily be a bad thing, yes ripped
out their strange gcc and
--- David Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Landley wrote:
If I do the dd line in the title under 2.4.0 I get
an
out.txt file of 591 bytes.
It isn't broken, you have no more entropy. You must
have some system
activity of various sorts before you regain some
entropy. Moving
I've got a 20 drive raid0 set up off of two asus fiber
channel controllers using the qlogicfc.c driver. (I
think it's a variant of ISP2200.) Dual pentium 866
SMP machine, apparently stable under NT. Half a gig
of ram, booting off of a different drive (hanging off
of an LSI1010 scsi controller
More data:
I changed QLOGICFC_REQ_QUEUE_LEN from 127 to 255, and
the lockup hasn't happened again yet, in circumstances
that fairly reliably reproduced it before. (Could
just mean I have to hit it harder.)
BUT: I am still getting those "no handle slots, this
should not happen" messages.
I think the hangs were actually CAUSED by the messages
being printked. If I make those go away, it stops
getting unhappy. (I suspect repeatedly printk-ing
stuff from the middle of the scsi layer with
interrupts disabled and other fun stuff occuring is
not a good thing. Delays something or
The new driver works fine on the box here, produces all sorts of debug
gorp to the console though. Most of the unnecessary printk's are
commented out, these are the three I've been seeing while playing around
with mpg123 and some mp3 files...
Other than that, it worked for me...
Rob
---
Heads up everybody. Scott McNealy has apparently been
calling Solaris Sun's implementation of Linux.
Trademark violation time.
The article's here:
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2000-12-14-020-04-NW-CY
Quick quote:
When asked by a reporter why Sun's new clustering
software was
--- "Jon 'maddog' Hall, Executive Director, Linux
International" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Warning: Highly controversial topic ahead.
Messenger does not want to be shot]
Aw come on, it's traditional. :)
This does bring up an interesting situation.
The Linux community keeps saying that
--- Rik van Riel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Rob Landley wrote:
people just don't get it, do you? All Linux
applications run on Solaris, which is our
implementation of Linux. Now ask the question
again,"
I wouldn't worry about this. It's only a question
of
--- Larry McVoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yup, that's Scooter (all the Sun old timers call him
Scooter, I dunno where
it came from, I wasn't enough of an old timer).
And, yeah, he does a lot
of marketing. But in many respects, he's the
perfect CEO. He's always
out in public, pushing
--- Dana Lacoste [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think he did that at all :
(Devil's Advocate time :)
Always a fun occupation. :)
What he did was say that, while everyone was looking
at Linux as the solution to modern computing
problems,
he didn't need to : he already has Solaris. So
I am not sure it is a big deal. If you read the
comment it was more of an off-the-cuff remark.
I doubt anyone would testify in court that McNealy
said this. The only way it is something to worry
about is if they used it in a printed format (IANAL)
Law isn't an all-or-nothing thing.
The UPX team owns all copyright in all of UPX and in each part of
UPX. Therefore, the UPX team may choose which license(s), and has
chosen two
...
This permits using UPX to pack a non-GPL executable.
Stupid question time: isn't this what the LGPL was designed to do? The
Library GPL, so
Its probably very hard to defeat. It also in its current form means
you can throw disk defragmenting tools out. Dead, gone. Welcome to
the United Police State Of America.
Doesn't anybody remember the days of "dongle keys" on the Commodore 64?
Plug a special circuit into the joystick port in
Andre Hedrick wrote:
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Rob Landley wrote:
And we all remember how the pirates got around this, don't we? The easy
way: crack the program.
Nope...it is embedded to the vender portion of the media.
My point was that using this kind of thing to protect applications
(Argh! Linus replies to my post and my cc: to the linux-kernel was to
rutgers.edu. Teach me to post on three hours of sleep, it's like
getting a hole-in-one with nobody around...)
Linus said in Re: Patch (repost): cramfs memory corruption fix
I wonder what to do about this - the limits are
He replied to my bad cc:, so forwarding this here should be okay...
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Rob Landley wrote:
So fork ramfs already. Copy the snapshot you like as an educational
tool, call it skeletonfs.c or some such, and let the current code evolve
Okay, the sleep situation has not improved. I'll admit that right now.
But it's ABOUT to. G'night...
Rob
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Rob Landley wrote:
So fork ramfs already. Copy the snapshot you like as an educational
tool, call it skeletonfs.c or some such, and let the current code evolve
Under 2.2.16, broadcast packets addressed to
255.255.255.255 do not go out to all interfaces in a
machine with multiple network cards. They're getting
routed out the default gateway's interface instead.
If I ifconfig eth1 down (which has the gateway behind
it), I start getting "no route to
--- Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Landley wrote:
Under 2.2.16, broadcast packets addressed to
255.255.255.255 do not go out to all interfaces in
a
machine with multiple network cards. They're
getting
routed out the default gateway's interface
instead.
Are the network
--- "Richard B. Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Using an IP packet of 255.255.255.255 doesn't mean
it's a broadcast
packet. It is going to your default gateway because
it is outside
your netmask, which guarantees that it is not a
broadcast.
1) No, it's still a broadcast packet when it
--- Philippe Troin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So the question is, is the stack's behavior right?
If
not, what's involved in fixing it, and if so, is
it
documented anywhere?
I think historically, BSD stacks were routing
255.255.255.255
--- Paul Flinders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
3) Java sucks in many ways. Today's way is that
...
There is no way to query the current machine's
interfaces without resorting to
native code.
I faced this problem a while ago - in the end I
cheated
--- Philippe Troin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The source IP address (as returned by getsockname())
is only set when
the socket is connected... It follows the same
logic: for a multihomed
machine, we know which interface will be used only
when we know
The kernel thread the new rtl8139 driver spawns
apparently wants to write to stdout, because it counts
as an unfinished process that prevents an ssh session
from exiting.
I have a script that remotely reconfigures subnets in
a vpn, which gets run via an ssh in through eth0 and
does, among other
--- Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Landley wrote:
The kernel thread the new rtl8139 driver spawns
apparently wants to write to stdout, because it
counts
as an unfinished process that prevents an ssh
session
from exiting.
Does this help?
--- Andrew Morton [EMAIL
--- Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ack. You never said 2.2.19 :(
It won't apply...
No, but this one did. (Never underestimate the power
of somebody with source code, a text editor, and the
willingness to totally hose their system.)
And it fixed the problem. Thank you.
Rob
I realize that assembly is platform-specific. Being
that I use the IA32 class machine, that's what I
would write for. Others who use other platforms could
do the deed for their native language.
Meaning we'd still need a good C implementation anyway
for the 75% of platforms nobody's going to
On Tuesday 12 June 2001 12:29, Alan Cox wrote:
If your algorithm can work well with say 2Gb windows on the data and only
change window evey so often (in computing terms) then it should be ok, if
its access is random you need to look at a 64bit box like an Alpha, Sparc64
or eventually IA64
On Tuesday 12 June 2001 18:34, Craig Lyons wrote:
We have a patch that fixes this and are wondering if it
is possible to get this patch into the kernel, and if so, how this would be
done?
Well, you start by reading this:
http://www.linuxhq.com/kernel/v2.4/doc/SubmittingPatches.html
Which
I have scripts that ssh into large numbers of boxes, which are sometimes
down. The timeout for figuring out the box is down is over an hour. This is
just insane.
Telnet and ftp behave similarly, or at least tthey lasted the 5 minutes I was
willing to wait, anyway. Basically anything that
You can tune things by setting the tcp-timeout probably..I don't
know exactly where to set this..
Aha, found it. /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syn_retries
I am a victim of the exponential retry falloff, it would seem. syn_retries
of 1 takes a few seconds, 3 takes less than half a minute, and 5
On Wednesday 13 June 2001 05:40, Luigi Genoni wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Ben Greear wrote:
You can tune things by setting the tcp-timeout probably..I don't
know exactly where to set this..
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_fin_timeout
default is 60.
Never got that far. My problem was actually
On Wednesday 13 June 2001 03:06, Andre Hedrick wrote:
No I would not take their code and apply it.
I might not even want to look at it.
Well, you're maintainer and I'm obviously not, but it's nice to hear you've
kept an open mind on this issue. :)
All I want is the API rules to the
Okay, I'll bite. What's HCI stand for?
I'm guessing it ends in Connection Interface, but the H has me stumped.
Happy? Hostile? Hysterical? Hippopotamus?
If we're connecting a bluetooth compliant hippopotamus to Linux, I can only
hope there's an RFC somewhere explaining how to do it.
On Thursday 14 June 2001 08:14, David Luyer wrote:
Well, I'm actually looking at the 2nd idea I mentioned in my e-mail -- a
very small kernel package which has a config script, a list of config
options and the files they depend on and an appropriately tagged CVS tree
which can then be used
On Tuesday 19 June 2001 12:52, Larry McVoy wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 05:26:09PM +0100, Matthew Kirkwood wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Larry McVoy wrote:
``Think of it this way: threads are like salt, not like pasta. You
like salt, I like salt, we all like salt. But we eat more
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 07:25, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 09:00:47AM +, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
Just the fact that some people use Java (or any other language) does
not mean, that they don't care about performance, system-design or
any elegance whatsoever
On Tuesday 19 June 2001 19:31, Timur Tabi wrote:
Amen. This is one of the reasons why I also prefer OS/2 over Linux.
Preferred.
OS/2's day has come and gone. IBM killed it with a stupid diversion into the
power PC version between 1993 and 1995. By the time Windows 95 was released,
MS had
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 10:35, Mike Porter wrote:
But that foregoes the point that the code is far more complex and harder
to make 'obviously correct', a concept that *does* translate well to
userspace.
One point is that 'obviously correct' is much harder to 'prove' for
threads (or
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 12:53, Larry McVoy wrote:
We couldn't believe that Java was really that bad so our GUI guy, Aaron
Kushner, sat down and rewrote the revision history browser in Java.
On a 500 node graph, the Java tool was up to 85MB. The tk tool doing
the same thing was 5MB. Note
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 15:27, Mike Harrold wrote:
Martin Dalecki wrote:
Blah blah blah. The performance of the Transmeta CPU SUCKS ROCKS. No
matter
what they try to make you beleve. A venerable classical desing like
the Geode outperforms them in any terms. There is simple significant
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 15:53, Martin Dalecki wrote:
Mike Harrold wrote:
Well the transmeta cpu isn't cheap actually.
Any processor's cheap once it's got enough volume. That's an effect not a
cause.
And if you talk about
super computing, hmm what about some PowerPC CPU variant - they
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 17:20, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
Rob Landley writes:
My only real gripe with Linux's threads right now [...] is
that ps and top and such aren't thread aware and don't group them
right.
I'm told they added some kind of threadgroup field to processes
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 18:07, J . A . Magallon wrote:
On 20010620 Rob Landley wrote:
What do you worry about caches if every bytecode turns into a jump and more
code ?
'cause the jump may be overlappable with extra execution cores in RISC and
VLIW?
I must admit, I've never actually seen
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 18:31, Daniel Phillips wrote:
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 23:33, Rik van Riel wrote:
On 20 Jun 2001, Miles Lane wrote:
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html
Yes, he sure knows how to bring Linux to the attention
of people ;)
Not to
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 20:42, D. Stimits wrote:
Rob Landley wrote:
...snip...
The patches-linus-actuall-applies mailing list idea is based on how Linus
says he works: he appends patches he likes to a file and then calls patch
-p1 thatfile after a mail reading session. It wouldn't
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 23:13, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
Then again JavaOS was an abortion on top of Slowaris. [...]
This is a false statemenet, Rob. It was an abortion, all right,
but not related to Solaris in any way at all.
I worked on the sucker for six months at IBM in 1997. I don't know
On Thursday 21 June 2001 10:02, Jesse Pollard wrote:
Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 17:20, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
Rob Landley writes:
My only real gripe with Linux's threads right now [...] is
that ps and top and such aren't thread aware and don't group
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 21:57, D. Stimits wrote:
MySQL is just a sample. I mention it because it is quite easy to link a
web server to. Imagine patch running on a large file that is a
conglomeration of 50 small patches; it could easily summarize this, and
storing it through MySQL adds a
On Thursday 21 June 2001 04:37, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
Devils' advocate position: If Linux would not be under GPL but under
BSD license, M$ may have already done so. But consider them porting
one of their monster applications and release it just to find out that
they've linked to
On Thursday 21 June 2001 04:50, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ooh, do I get to say I told you so? (LinuxToday buried my submission
way back under a blurb about caldera, but still...)
And the quote of stealing the TCP stack from BSD is still wrong
On Thursday 21 June 2001 17:49, Schilling, Richard wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Rob Landley
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 9:25 AM
[snip]
BSD forked to death in the 80's. Everybody from ATT to Sun
to IBM who saw
money in it spun off their own incompatable, proprietary
On Thursday 21 June 2001 18:49, Alan Cox wrote:
Except that Apple keeps the old code open. Probably because
they'll gain nothing from it, and at best, they can appeal to
the techies.
A company that seems to write 'you shall not work on open source projects
in your spare time' into its
On Thursday 21 June 2001 14:46, Timur Tabi wrote:
1. License the Linux kernel under a different license that is effectively
the GPL but with additional text that clarifies the binary module issue.
Unfortunately, this license cannot be called the GPL. Politically, this
would probably be a
On Thursday 21 June 2001 16:34, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
The in-core kernel image, including a dynamically-loaded
driver, is clearly a derived work per copyright law. As above, the
portion consisting only of the dynamically-loaded driver's binary code
may or may not be a derived work
On Friday 22 June 2001 17:19, Timur Tabi wrote:
** Reply to message from Eric S. Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 22 Jun
2001 17:09:45 -0400
What happens now when somebody takes over responsibility for a file
or subsystem and the MAINTAINERS file doesn't get patched, either because
that
On Saturday 23 June 2001 13:57, Mike Jagdis wrote:
I hope the following adds a more direct perspective on this, as I
was a user at the time.
I was _almost_ at university :-). However I do have a first edition
of the IBM Xenix Software Development Guide from december 1984. It has
'84 IBM
On Friday 22 June 2001 10:00, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Eric S. Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're a bit irritated. That's good. I *want* people who don't write
help entries for their configuration symbols to be a bit irritated.
That way, they might get
On Friday 22 June 2001 18:41, Alan Chandler wrote:
I am not subscribed to the list, but I scan the archives and saw the
following. Please cc e-mail me in followups.
I've had several requests to start a mailing list on this, actually... Might
do so in a bit...
I was working (and still am)
On Friday 22 June 2001 10:46, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
I did some threaded programming on OS/2 and it was real pain. The main
design flaw in OS/2 API is that thread can be blocked only on one
condition. There is no way thread can wait for more events. For example
Sure. But you know what a
On Sunday 24 June 2001 17:41, J . A . Magallon wrote:
On 20010622 Rob Landley wrote:
I still consider the difference between threads and processes with shared
resources (memory, fds, etc) to be largely semantic.
They should not be the same. Processes are processes, and threads were
designed
On Saturday 23 June 2001 20:13, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That would be the X version of emacs. And there's the explanation
for the split between GNU and X emacs: it got forked and the
closed-source version had a vew years of divergent development
On Saturday 23 June 2001 23:07, Mike Castle wrote:
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 09:41:29PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, yes, the RT/PC. That brings back some fond memories. My first
exposure to Unix was with AIX on the RT. I still have some of those
weird-sized RT AIX manuals around
On Saturday 23 June 2001 20:49, John Adams wrote:
On Saturday 23 June 2001 10:07, Rob Landley wrote:
Here's what I'm looking for:
AIX was first introduced for the IBM RT/PC in 1986, which came out of the
early RISC research. It was ported to PS/2 and S/370 by SAA, and was
based
On Saturday 23 June 2001 22:41, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, yes, the RT/PC. That brings back some fond memories. My first
exposure to Unix was with AIX on the RT. I still have some of those
weird-sized RT AIX manuals around somewhere...
Wayne
Ooh! Old manuals!
Would you be willing to
On Sunday 24 June 2001 09:46, Luigi Genoni wrote:
no SMP
x86 only (and similar, e.g. Crusoe)
Is this a joke?
I hope it is.
Luigi
Nah, I think it's an intentional troll.
Either that or somebody who's So naieve they honestly think that having
different text mode and binary mode
On Saturday 23 June 2001 22:47, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ummm... GEM was the Geos stuff? (Yeah I remember it, I haven't
researched it yet though...)
GEM was a gui from Digital Research I believe.
Geoworks/Geos was a seperate entity.
Ah, the DR-DOS
On Sunday 24 June 2001 18:30, J . A . Magallon wrote:
Take a programmer comming from other system to linux. If he wants multi-
threading and protable code, he will choose pthreads. And you say to him:
do it with 'clone', it is better. Answer: non protable. Again: do it
with fork(), it is
On Sunday 24 June 2001 21:45, Jeff Dike wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Licklidder wasn't just a bigwig behind arpanet, he also kicked off
project mac at MIT.
You're right, but you could at least spell his name right - J. C. R.
Licklider.
Jeff (who was his last
On Sunday 24 June 2001 19:50, Larry McVoy wrote:
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 12:30:02AM +0200, J . A . Magallon wrote:
They use fork().
They port their app to solaris.
The performance sucks.
It is not Solaris fault.
It is linux fast fork() ...
One for the quotes page, eh? We're terribly
On Sunday 24 June 2001 18:41, Chris Meadors wrote:
Okay, I brushed on GEOS, Microsoft, Xenix, and even Linux. So I'm as on
topic as the rest of this thread. I just have never told my story on l-k,
and this seemed a good place to put a little of it in. :)
-Chris
I just created a mailing
On Sunday 24 June 2001 22:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, but I'm hanging on to my old computer manuals. The AIX manuals in
particular have sentimemtal value for me.
Entirely undersandable.
Would you be willing to xerox any introduction or about sections?
OTOH, I have quite a few old
On Monday 25 June 2001 11:13, you wrote:
1937 claude shannon A Symbolic Analysis of Relay and Switching Circuits,
1948 claude shannon A mathematical theory of information.
without those you're kind in trouble on the computing front...
Yeah, I know I've bumped into that name (and probably
On Monday 25 June 2001 13:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
If you're really keen on old mags and manuals I'll go up to attic and look
around. I know there are old SCO Xenix TCP/IP, as well as Byte and Dr
Dobbs
Ooh! Yes! Very much so.
Thanks,
Rob
The mailing list for this discussion
in Edinburgh,Scotland
On 25 Jun 2001, Kai Henningsen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob Landley) wrote on 24.06.01 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Now if somebody here could just point me to a decent reference on A/UX
- Apple's mid-80's version of Unix (for the early macintosh, I
believe...)
http
On Monday 25 June 2001 15:23, Kai Henningsen wrote:
The AS/400 is still going strong. It's a virtual machine based on a
relational database (among other things), mostly programmed in COBOL (I
think the C compiler has sizeof(void*) == 16 or something like that, so
you can put a database
On Tuesday 26 June 2001 08:57, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
Ah, fame at last :-)
You seem to have been inexplicably excluded from a quarter century of unix
by peter salus. (You're not in the index, anyway.) Haven't read life with
unix yet...
I'm not on the linux-kernel list but a friend
On Tuesday 26 June 2001 12:15, Daniel Phillips wrote:
On Tuesday 26 June 2001 17:15, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Jocelyn Mayer wrote:
you get DR-DOS = Digital Research DOS, then you get Novell DOS, then
you get Caldera OpenDOS, currently opendos is owned by lineo
Yes, and
On Thursday 28 June 2001 14:36, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
You know what I hate? Debugging stuff like BIOS-e820, zone messages,
dentry|buffer|page-cache hash table entries, CPU: Before vendor init,
CPU: After vendor init, etc etc, PCI: Probing PCI hardware,
ip_conntrack (256 buckets, 2048
On Friday 29 June 2001 15:11, Clayton, Mark wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Paul Fulghum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 4:02 PM
To: Pavel Machek; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Schilling, Richard;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Henning P. Schmiedehausen;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thursday 05 July 2001 21:45, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
Oh, cry me a river. You can set the RUID, EUID, SUID, and FUID
in that same parent process or after you fork().
Okay, I'll bite.
The file user ID is fine, the effective user ID is what the suid bit sets to
root of course, the saved
My devices on my laptop work very strangely with kernel 2.4.6.
-- Sound problems:
The sound card on my laptop (Dell Inspiron 3500) works fine when the system
first boots up, but stops working with the first suspend. Any attempt to
write sound to it after that blocks indefinitely. I don't
Help.
I thought transparent proxying would allow some means
for the recipient of the proxied connections to find
out what their original destination port and socket
address were. This does not seem to be the case. The
socket structure only has one address and one socket,
and those have the
Yeah, I found it.
While researching replacing the 2.2 kernel with 2.4 to
get my proxy-oid to work, I stumbled accross the
following section in the unofficial NAT-HOWTO (which
is not on linuxdoc's website as far as I can tell).
At this address:
2.2 allowed me to set DMA on an SIS 5513 using an IBM
Deskstar 40 gig IDE. 2.4 goes "Operation not
permitted" when I try it.
Why?
I hit it with ide0=ata66 in lilo, and it sped up from
3 megs/sec to 5 megs/second, but I used to get 12.
hdparm /dev/hda still says I'm not using DMA.
I realise
--- Rusty Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Summary: you had to use a *search engine* to find an
obscure piece of
coding information.
Actually, I had to use a search engine to find a
tangentially related howto that halfway through
mentioned something in passing which gave me a clue of
I'm trying to make 3 copies of a 40 gig IBM deskstar
IDE drive. I've got red hat 7 booted into single user
mode, doing the following:
cat /dev/hda | count | tee /dev/hdb | tee /dev/hdc
/dev/hdd
The copy seems to work fine if I never let the console
blank. I copied 2 gigs worth of data (at
How do I do the following:
# -- pppd notty | pppoe -I eth1 | --
|_|
I.E. connect the stdout of a process (or chain
thereof) to its own stdin?
So I wrote a program to do it, along the lines of:
sixty-nine /bin/sh -c "pppd notty | pppoe -I eth1"
With an
Apparently, the pipe
fd's evaporate when the process does an execve.
Check out:
#include unistd.h
#include fcntl.h
/* ... */
fcntl (fd, F_SETFD, (long) FD_CLOEXEC);
to set/reset the close on exec bit.
Cool. That's EXACTLY what I was looking
On Tuesday 13 February 2007 2:25 pm, Linus Torvalds wrote:
THE FACT IS, THAT strlen() IS DEFINED UNIVERSALLY AS TAKING char *.
That BY DEFINITION means that strlen() cannot care about the sign,
because the sign IS NOT DEFINED UNIVERSALLY!
And if you cannot accept that fact, it's your
Signed-off-by: Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The kernel assumes that nobody will ever legitimately feed in a kernel command
line option with a period in it, and the kernel is wrong: I'm feeding the
path to a script as an argument to my init program, the name of the script
ends in .sh.
I've
I ran make ARCH=x86_64 menuconfig, did a lot of editing, and saved
the .config. Then I copied that to a backup, ran make oldconfig on the
config I'd just saved, and compared it with the backup:
--- .config 2007-02-27 18:10:01.0 -0500
+++ tryit 2007-02-27 18:09:09.0
On Tuesday 27 February 2007 6:43 pm, Gregor Jasny wrote:
Hi,
2007/2/28, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I ran make ARCH=x86_64 menuconfig, did a lot of editing, and saved
the .config. Then I copied that to a backup, ran make oldconfig on the
I'd try with make ARCH=x86_64 oldconfig
I
On Tuesday 27 February 2007 6:36 pm, Randy Dunlap wrote:
The first hunk I expect, the second I did not. Anybody care to venture a
guess why the visibility logic is unstable?
can we get .config^Wtryit ? (version 0, not version 1)
Unfortunately, the first .config was generated by me
So doing:
make ARCH=powerpc CROSS=powerpc-
Chugs along fine for a while, but then it ends with:
MODPOST vmlinux
ln: accessing `arch/powerpc/boot/zImage': No such file or directory
make[1]: *** [arch/powerpc/boot/zImage] Error 1
make: *** [zImage] Error 2
I.E. it builds vmlinux,
On Monday 02 April 2007 8:51 pm, Tony Breeds wrote:
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 03:14:14PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
Sure, quite easily the source of the trouble. Attached in both
full .config
and mini.config formats.
Okay, I have no idea how it happend but you seem to have an invalid
On Wednesday 19 September 2007 1:03:09 pm Tim Bird wrote:
Recently, the CE Linux forum has been working to revive the
Linux-tiny project. At OLS, I asked for interested parties
to volunteer to become the new maintainer for the Linux-tiny patchset.
A few candidates came forward, but
On Wednesday 14 November 2007 12:54:44 Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 11:51:50PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
Building with the attached .config on x86-64, it does this:
CC arch/um/kernel/smp.o
In file included from include/asm/arch/tlb.h:11,
from include
On Thursday 15 November 2007 00:02:55 Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 11:58:15PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
On Wednesday 14 November 2007 12:54:44 Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 11:51:50PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
Building with the attached .config on x86-64, it does
1 - 100 of 1794 matches
Mail list logo
