On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 1:40 AM, Andres Perera wrote:
> sorry, but i never sold nm as the sole step granting immunity. i
> explicitly presented it as an example. nevertheless, the full list of
> things i do do not cover all of possible changes you pointed out. i
> constructed it in a way that also
sorry, but i never sold nm as the sole step granting immunity. i
explicitly presented it as an example. nevertheless, the full list of
things i do do not cover all of possible changes you pointed out. i
constructed it in a way that also works with snapshots:
diff include/sys/syscall{args,}.h with
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Andres Perera wrote:
> all of the calls in syscalls.master map to a unique function, and all
> of them start with sys_. it's true that nm won't tell me about
> argument changes. i just risk it a little by assuming no one's that
> evil
Okay, granted nm will tell yo
and that will be an exception that i'll have to deal with, which is
entirely reasonable given that they rarely do change
another rare exception i could skirt around would be white space
changes that would deter me from diffing syscalls.master instead of
`nm /bsd` during automation, but the problem
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Andres Perera wrote:
> all of the calls in syscalls.master map to a unique function, and all
> of them start with sys_. it's true that nm won't tell me about
> argument changes. i just risk it a little by assuming no one's that
> evil
Heh. *Yesterday* tedu asked
since packages are done in synch with snapshots, i do not use the
trees because i rather use packages
it's not clear whether or not changes in snapshots are allowed to make
the packages incompatible with what you find in the repositories.
perhaps i would be able to retract what i said as silly (an
all of the calls in syscalls.master map to a unique function, and all
of them start with sys_. it's true that nm won't tell me about
argument changes. i just risk it a little by assuming no one's that
evil
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:44 PM,
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 21:41, eagir...@cox.net wrote:
>
>> What may be a slightly faster method of tracking close to current:
>>
>> http://www.tedunangst.com/snapper.html
>>
>> I haven't used it in a while, because I used to build the kernel
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 21:41, eagir...@cox.net wrote:
> What may be a slightly faster method of tracking close to current:
>
> http://www.tedunangst.com/snapper.html
>
> I haven't used it in a while, because I used to build the kernel with NTFS
> support, and never got back to using it after th
At 2012-06-20 0:00:21, Tony Sidaway wrote:
Summary: I want to turn my main system into a semi-automatic follower
of "-current" and I think this strategy may useful to the project. Is
this something that is already being done?
My rationale here is that it's a good thing for OpenBSD users who have
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> Summary: I want to turn my main system into a semi-automatic follower
> of "-current" and I think this strategy may useful to the project. Is
> this something that is already being done?
That's more or less what the snapshot process is, excep
> never mind the premise that snapshots contain changes not found in the
> trees, you state things to the effect of "user chooses wether or not
> to reboot to new kernel". didn't even bother; e.g., comparing nm
> outputs
well, hang on. quite often those diffs in snapshots are not yet
commited for
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Andres Perera wrote:
> didn't even bother; e.g., comparing nm
> outputs
Er, what are you expecting to divine by comparing nm output?
ultimately naive/incomplete approach
never mind the premise that snapshots contain changes not found in the
trees, you state things to the effect of "user chooses wether or not
to reboot to new kernel". didn't even bother; e.g., comparing nm
outputs
Hi Tony,
Tony Sidaway wrote on Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 01:00:21AM +0100:
> Summary: I want to turn my main system into a semi-automatic follower
> of "-current" and I think this strategy may useful to the project. Is
> this something that is already being done?
No.
The main reason being that follo
Summary: I want to turn my main system into a semi-automatic follower
of "-current" and I think this strategy may useful to the project. Is
this something that is already being done?
My rationale here is that it's a good thing for OpenBSD users who have
the technical skills to follow development a
16 matches
Mail list logo
