Behaviour of ksh(1)

2013-05-02 Thread Daode
Hi, you should try echo BEFORE unset KSH_VERSION echo AFTER in your ~/.shrc (note: i include that from within my ~/.profile and let it auto-protect itself against multiple inclusions since my shell startup scripts are multi-platform multi-shell, all in two). Note it doesn't matter if you

Re: Behaviour of ksh(1)

2013-05-02 Thread Daode
Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote: |On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 13:12, Steffen Daode Nurpmeso wrote: | Hi, you should try | | echo BEFORE | unset KSH_VERSION | echo AFTER | |ksh: unset: KSH_VERSION is read only | |So don't unset it? Yep it's nasty hah. Still, you get BEFORE ksh

Re: mbstowcs() null termination

2012-03-30 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Hi, Yarin wrote [2012-03-30 17:01+0200]: Hello, Is mbstowcs() suppose to null-terminate? I ask because, on OpenBSD 4.9 (generic, no patches), it never null terminates. Even though the C90 draft seems to imply that it should when there's enough room.

Re: cvs, stop ignoring *@#%@# files/directories named core

2012-03-26 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Stuart Henderson wrote [2012-03-26 11:16+0200]: An addition to ignore .git files, some of us use git locally to track changes pre-commit and, just like the existing ignore entries for RCS/SCCS/CVS control files, there is no reason to import these to CVS without an explicit ignore. Yeah!

wait4() busy endless OR: gcc: Internal error: Trace/BPT trap (program cc1)

2012-03-19 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Sorry folks for this shitty report, but i thought it's maybe better to send it out than not to be able to sleep or so. I guess it's somehow related to the rthread wait4() path, but of course i dunno. Here's what's happened: As always i did my weekly kernel+userland compilation this noon, and i

Re: vmmap replacement -- please test

2012-03-02 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Hi, David Coppa wrote: still rocking hard My old Athlon 1600+ blow dries something like I'm gruvm up the country, where the memory tastes like wine. Is this a regression, then?? --steffen

Re: -not for find(1)

2012-02-28 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
(peep)

-not for find(1)

2012-02-27 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Hello, this patch adds the -not operator to find(1). I personally always found -not easier to use due to shell escaping, but today may laziness has bitten back. And it's just one more non-POSIX-compliant option. --steffen Index: usr.bin/find/find.1

Re: NEW: libc getdelim(3) and getline(3)

2012-02-26 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
pax(1). --steffen Index: bin/pax/options.c === RCS file: /Users/steffen/arena/code.openbsd/src/bin/pax/options.c,v retrieving revision 1.74 diff -a -p -u -r1.74 options.c --- bin/pax/options.c 2 Dec 2010 04:08:27 - 1.74

Re: NEW: libc getdelim(3) and getline(3)

2012-02-26 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
unifdef(1). (Should complete bin and usr.bin.) (Did i press 'g' all the time? Sorry if not!) --steffen Index: usr.bin/unifdef/unifdef.c === RCS file: /Users/steffen/arena/code.openbsd/src/usr.bin/unifdef/unifdef.c,v retrieving

Re: NEW: libc getdelim(3) and getline(3)

2012-02-26 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
(All compile-tested after applying the patches.) --steffen

ksh(1), smaller one

2012-02-25 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
And this smaller diff excludes the node-based table. Since revision 1.8 (extra sanity checking for afree()) is the youngest commit of alloc.c i guess that checking should not be removed. But that unidirectional list walk is a real killer: with the test from one of my former mails and 1

ksh(1), big one

2012-02-25 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Wanted or not, here is the promised big diff which does the following: 1. Encapsulate struct table iteration usage (*All* direct accesses encapsulated with struct tstate.) 2. ktinit() shouldn't expect pow2 size requests.. (It's really better that way.) 3. Turn struct table over to

Re: NEW: libc getdelim(3) and getline(3)

2012-02-25 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
uudecode(1). --steffen Index: usr.bin/uudecode/uudecode.c === RCS file: /Users/steffen/arena/code.openbsd/src/usr.bin/uudecode/uudecode.c,v retrieving revision 1.17 diff -a -p -u -r1.17 uudecode.c --- usr.bin/uudecode/uudecode.c 27

Re: NEW: libc getdelim(3) and getline(3)

2012-02-25 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
lpr(1). --steffen Index: usr.sbin/lpr/common_source/common.c === RCS file: /Users/steffen/arena/code.openbsd/src/usr.sbin/lpr/common_source/common.c,v retrieving revision 1.33 diff -a -p -u -r1.33 common.c ---

Re: NEW: libc getdelim(3) and getline(3)

2012-02-25 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
diff3(1). --steffen Index: usr.bin/diff3/diff3prog.c === RCS file: /Users/steffen/arena/code.openbsd/src/usr.bin/diff3/diff3prog.c,v retrieving revision 1.11 diff -a -p -u -r1.11 diff3prog.c --- usr.bin/diff3/diff3prog.c 27 Oct

Re: ksh(1): encapsulate hashtable iteration usage

2012-02-19 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Otto Moerbeek wrote [2012-02-19 08:49+0100]: while I did graduate on a theoretical computer science subject myself I have no doubt about that. (?) I think this alternate hash table stuff is all overkill for ksh. But a linear array based implementation with INT_MAX/2 is a heavy thing. Did you

Re: ksh(1): encapsulate hashtable iteration usage

2012-02-18 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Steffen Daode Nurpmeso wrote [2012-02-15 14:55+0100]: the patch below localizes access of struct table internals to table.c by using the ktwalk()/ktnext() interface from proto.h instead of doing handcrafted table iterations. Yes it was wrong because it didn't take the flags into account

ksh(1): encapsulate hashtable iteration usage

2012-02-15 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Hey all, the patch below localizes access of struct table internals to table.c by using the ktwalk()/ktnext() interface from proto.h instead of doing handcrafted table iterations. Surely a useful change regardless of possibly turning over to a node-based hashmap approach. --steffen Index:

Update hash macro in sys/hash.h; gcc(1) ambiguity

2012-02-14 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
It turns out that sys/hash.h also uses Chris Toreks hash algorithm in the same 1:1 way that was present in Berkeley DB a decade ago. So maybe i prefer leaving optimization up to the compiler should be applied here, too. The patch does this. And - you know, i never made it into that gcc(1) code

Re: Keycode print mode (-r) for wsconsctl(8)

2012-02-01 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
For one: Tobias Stoeckmann already stated more yesterday, including that exit(3) in a signal handler is a bad thing. (It surely should have been _exit(2).) Version 3 (1) doesn't trash errno no more, (2) is hopefully less messy and (3) does no longer introduce a new file, so also more easyness for

Re: Keycode print mode (-r) for wsconsctl(8)

2012-01-31 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 - +++ keycode.c 31 Jan 2012 13:46:22 - @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@ +/* $OpenBSD$ */ + +/* + * Copyright (c) 2012 Steffen Daode Nurpmeso. + * All rights reserved. + * + * Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any + * purpose

Keycode print mode (-r) for wsconsctl(8)

2012-01-30 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Daode Nurpmeso. + * All rights reserved. + * + * Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any + * purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above + * copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies. + * + * THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED

wscons: rename KS_GROUP_Ascii to _Plain

2012-01-29 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Hey all interested, while writing a small wscons(4) keycode utility i asked myself why KS_GROUP_Ascii is named the way it is, since the (lower) byte carries more information, at least eventually. I looked around a bit, and found out that NetBSD did change the name to KS_GROUP_Plain, which is in

Re: vmmap replacement -- please test

2012-01-14 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Ariane van der Steldt wrote [2012-01-14 08:42+0100]: As far as I'm concerned, this diff will be commited once we unlock after release (in a coordinated manner ofcourse, since this is uvm we're talking about). It's about time too, ofcourse: 64 revisions of the same diff is alot. :D -- Ariane

Re: Compile time assertions

2011-11-15 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Ted Unangst wrote [2011-11-14 22:35+0100]: On Mon, Nov 14, 2011, Steffen Daode Nurpmeso wrote: Is there a reason not to use CTASSERT (and some kind of member_sizeof())? I couldn't find just any discussion on that in marc and gmane. Seems like a good idea, but your patch is wrong. Off

Compile time assertions

2011-11-14 Thread Steffen Daode Nurpmeso
Hi, my dhclient.c patch was very wrong. And it (falsely) removed a runtime check of some struct member size. But this very hunk (while wrong) led me to a question. Since saving even some bytes in shell scripts counts so much, i wonder why compile-time assertions are not used at all (AFAIK).