Re: match /etc/examples/printcap with spool directory in lpr/common_source/pathnames.h

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 07:56:54PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote: > Chris, you continue to amaze me. > > Upon running sysmerge, that will break everyone's setup. > > Like, can you try stuff before you send it out? > > I'm done. > Sorry. It was my misunderstanding that files in /etc/examples were

Re: gc the unp_gcing flag

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:42 AM, David Gwynne wrote: > the gc is run from a task in the systq, so we dont need a flag to > serialise it. it is already serialised. > > ok? I have a TODO entry saying "instead of triggering the unp_gc task, set a per-thread flag and then do the

Re: match /etc/examples/printcap with spool directory in lpr/common_source/pathnames.h

Chris, you continue to amaze me. Upon running sysmerge, that will break everyone's setup. Like, can you try stuff before you send it out? I'm done. > /etc/examples/printcap doesn't match > #define _PATH_DEFSPOOL "/var/spool/output/lpd" > > Which seems sensible to keep lpd jobs

match /etc/examples/printcap with spool directory in lpr/common_source/pathnames.h

/etc/examples/printcap doesn't match #define _PATH_DEFSPOOL "/var/spool/output/lpd" Which seems sensible to keep lpd jobs out of output directory Index: printcap === RCS file: /cvs/src/etc/examples/printcap,v retrieving

stale entries for RAIDframe in chrtoblktbl

For most architectures there still is an entry for the removed RAIDframe device lurking in chrtoblktbl. While there I truncated the tables to the minimum required size; chrtoblk() and blktochr() are designed to handle a table shorter than cdevsw. Ok? natano Index: arch/alpha/alpha/conf.c

Re: rtadvd: remove more dead code

j...@wxcvbn.org (Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas) writes: > - a few *cnt members of struct rainfo aren't used for anything > - the SIOCGIFPREFIX_IN6 ioctl has been deprecated since June 2002 > - prefix_match() and in6a_site_allrouters are remnants from the > Renumbering code (now in the Attic) > > ok?

Re: x86 callframe definitions

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 03:10:54PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > This rename and move the i386 and amd64 ``callframe'' structures in order > to use it in MI code. My goal is to unify our architectures to be able > to retrieve the PC of the calling function with as little MD code as > possible.

Re: ddb: remove support for multiple symbol tables

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 03:05:21PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > I'd like to be able to iterate over all the kernel symbols. I could > do like some of the functions below and abuse ``db_last_symtab'' but > we since only have a single symbol table there's no point in keeping > a complex

x86 callframe definitions

This rename and move the i386 and amd64 ``callframe'' structures in order to use it in MI code. My goal is to unify our architectures to be able to retrieve the PC of the calling function with as little MD code as possible. There's no functional change in this diff. ok? Index:

ddb: remove support for multiple symbol tables

I'd like to be able to iterate over all the kernel symbols. I could do like some of the functions below and abuse ``db_last_symtab'' but we since only have a single symbol table there's no point in keeping a complex interface. Ok? Index: ddb/db_hangman.c

gc the unp_gcing flag

the gc is run from a task in the systq, so we dont need a flag to serialise it. it is already serialised. ok? Index: uipc_usrreq.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/kern/uipc_usrreq.c,v retrieving revision 1.95 diff -u -p -r1.95

what's in i386 /boot program headers after 256 byte space ?

I'am reading i386 boot code, find LINKADDR=0x40120 LOADADDR=0x4 What is in between LOADADDR and LOADADDR has 288 byte ? and in boot file ELF file header 52 byte add program header 32 byte to .txt at 120h has 256 byte space, use hex tool view this 256 space fill 0; how generate this

Re: boot_amd64(8) - mention biosboot(8)

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:18:17AM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 08:53:34AM +, Jason McIntyre wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 08:15:54AM +0100, Michal Mazurek wrote: > > > boot(8) says: "As described in boot_amd64(8), this program is loaded by > > > the biosboot(8)",

Re: boot_amd64(8) - mention biosboot(8)

On 08:53:34, 25.02.16, Jason McIntyre wrote: > there should be a comma after "bootstrap" > and the biosboot Xr should go before the boot Xr > ditto for the parts below. Thanks, corrected: Index: man8.amd64/boot_amd64.8 === RCS

Re: boot_amd64(8) - mention biosboot(8)

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 08:53:34AM +, Jason McIntyre wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 08:15:54AM +0100, Michal Mazurek wrote: > > boot(8) says: "As described in boot_amd64(8), this program is loaded by > > the biosboot(8)", but other than mentioning "/usr/mdec/biosboot" > > boot_amd64(8) does

Re: boot_amd64(8) - mention biosboot(8)

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 08:15:54AM +0100, Michal Mazurek wrote: > boot(8) says: "As described in boot_amd64(8), this program is loaded by > the biosboot(8)", but other than mentioning "/usr/mdec/biosboot" > boot_amd64(8) does not describe biosboot(8). My attempt at a fix: > morning. > > Index: