Re: VI reasons (was Re: Base Set: Suggested additions removals.)
On Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 09:30:17AM -0400, Ray Kinsella wrote: On Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Stig Sandbeck Mathisen wrote: * Michael Dietrich (Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 04:31:52AM +0200) if you all do not stop this discussion i start writing an editor. easy to use just as EDIT.EXE. for anybody, especially a beginner. also for professionals. :wq Go ahead, it wouldn't hurt, would it? :-) dosemu + edit.exe ... works for me (C: LOL!...ok... YOU try and fit that on a boot/rescue disk along with all of the other stuff that the disk needs. :) -Steve -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Intent to package: 3d modellers and VRML tools
On Fri, Jun 19, 1998 at 08:12:07PM +0200, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Pen~a wrote: - moonlight and GLspace: 3D modellers (which also export to VRML) ^ Is thsi Moonlight Creator? Moonlight Creator is already packaged under the name moonlight. It is also not listed on the WNPP ..so it is not available either. I don't know about the others ...but I think 3D modelers are cool :) I must learn how to use them... -Steve -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#23457 acknowledged by developer (xexec is not present in menus!)
On Wed, Jun 17, 1998 at 11:54:34AM -0500, Zed Pobre wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On Tue, 16 Jun 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ?package(splay):needs=X11 section=XShells\ ^^^ This looks suspicous to me I read the documentation on the Menu Package a while back. should xexec depend on splay to have a menu? The menu package chacks to DOH! I looked over this entry twice and missed it both times. It isn't supposed to be there. I also maintain splay and did a cut and paste and apparantly forgot to correct this part. I just corrected this. I'll upload in a couple minutes when the buildpackage is done. The new menu entry is: Its easy to do I guess :). You know..after resoponding to your post I got curious as to why some programs I use don't have menus (turns out a while ago I copied menu-defs.hook to my .fvwm2/ dir ...oops) And while digging around I found another program (floatbg) with a typo which did the same thingso I guess it is an easy mistake :) ?package(xexec):needs=X11 section=XShells\ title=xexec command=/usr/X11R6/bin/xexec looks good to me :) Thanks for catching this. no problem...I kno wwhat its like to read over something and screw it up because I know what it SHOULD read and miss it...sorta like the othewr day I found a statement that I couldn't say...because it was so convoluted every time I tried to say it I corrected myself. -Steve -- ** Stephen Carpenter ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** I am an agnostic; I do not pretend to know what many ignorant men are sure of. -- Clarance Darrow pgp0GDVlbJPie.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Base system tarball Q [XTerminal]
On Wed, Jun 17, 1998 at 02:08:05PM -0400, Avery Pennarun wrote: On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 11:49:25PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also found out that I hafta do a chroot . bash --login once to get it to configure the base system (ie keymap stuff) You could copy /etc/resolv.conf and other config files out of the server's /etc directory. Most of that should be correct (though you'll have to do something special for 'nameserver 127.0.0.1' obviously). yes definitly...well really...I shouldn't need it...I mean... I am just connecting to a host, once I have the IPs needed, what is the nameserver needed for? I've done an X terminal on a single 1.44 MB floppy. Almost all of the stuff on the base system is unnecessary: what you really need is a simple init system (calling ifconfig/route), libc, X, XF86Config, and rgb.txt. wow...I never thought it would fit on 1 floppy...then again... on my system X is only 4728 May 5 23:46 X hmm but XF86_S3V is over 2 MB :( ohg well back to NFS root :) as for the base system...I do that for flexibility...I mean what if I decide tomorow I want more than X Terminals? maybe I want them to be X Terminals...and PVM hosts :) just add the packages I need to the System with chroot. Most of the useful tools you can use to set up the system can be found in the busybox package that comes on the Debian rootdisk. Wonderful program, that one. I will have to check that out...hmm busybox...where is that? That said, I've also made NFS-rooted X terminals and they're easily fast enough -- once X is loaded, there's no more disk access. Mine went from zero to XDM in about 45 seconds (over an ARCnet network, which is slower than ethernet) and needed only 4 megs of RAM to run happily. Nice nice...what type of systems they runnign on? It would be great to see a Debian package that set all this up. It would also be quite nice to see busybox broken out into its own package. yes It would...in any case I hope to make a little document and web page on how to do it (I just love doing something and then documenting it on a web page) I may be able to help if you run into any major problems setting up the X terminal. thats good to know...I have it mostly ready at work now... in fact I have a chroot'd shell..run X..which queries back to xdm which is runnng on the same host (non-chroot'd) and an xfs (also same non-chroot) Now all I need to do is get the NFS mount going and try i twith a real second machine. Have fun, I plan to :)..with all the problems ive solved..and all the games I have played I never had as much fun with Windows as I do doing this stuff with Linux -Steve -- ** Stephen Carpenter ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** I am an agnostic; I do not pretend to know what many ignorant men are sure of. -- Clarance Darrow pgp4IkdsDBY75.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Base system tarball Q [XTerminal]
On Thu, Jun 18, 1998 at 01:52:17AM -0400, Avery Pennarun wrote: On Thu, Jun 18, 1998 at 01:23:42AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: connecting to a host, once I have the IPs needed, what is the nameserver needed for? Well, you could have a nameserver entry for xdm-server (or something) which is looked up while your X-terminal boots. This does seem pointless to me, but who's counting. no comment :) I've done an X terminal on a single 1.44 MB floppy. Almost all of the stuff on the base system is unnecessary: what you really need is a simple init system (calling ifconfig/route), libc, X, XF86Config, and rgb.txt. wow...I never thought it would fit on 1 floppy...then again... hmm but XF86_S3V is over 2 MB :( ohg well back to NFS root :) Ah, the joys of inordinate bloat. This was about two years ago, before libc6 and egcs started doubling the size of things. ahh that explains it...hmm someone mentiond seeing Small X Servers on sunsite... You may be able to squeeze it on anyway, if you use a compressed ramdisk. (Note that if you use a ramdisk, you need more than the minimal 4 megs -- but if you use an X server that large, you probably need more than 4 megs anyway.) I am now planning to use a small root disk which will then NFS mount the rest of the system with the actual Xhmm an internally mounted 3.5 drive with a disk in it 3.5 drives cost $20...disks are almost free (used to be free before AOL switched to CDs..they don't seem to send disks anymore)..so.. its a slow, $20 hard drive :) (and at only 1.44 MB..its close enough to diskless for me) That said, I've also made NFS-rooted X terminals and they're easily fast enough -- once X is loaded, there's no more disk access. Mine went from zero to XDM in about 45 seconds (over an ARCnet network, which is slower than ethernet) and needed only 4 megs of RAM to run happily. Nice nice...what type of systems they runnign on? 486DX/33 or 486DX/40 with XF86_S3. It was quite a while ago. Nowadays they would look pretty slow compared to a real computer. Also, I may have been a bit unclear above -- these really were only X terminals and accessed a _remote_ xdm server. You can run a full X session in 4 megs, but you'll have to swap like crazy (which you currently can't do on a diskless client). Ahhh but to quote the NFS-root HOWTO: * There is a patch floating around, that allows for swapping over NFS. It was sent to me (during a private high workload phase), but somehow I managed to loose the mail :( so...it can currently be done...just need to find the patch :) -Steve -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Base system tarball Q [XTerminal]
On Thu, Jun 18, 1998 at 03:26:11PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: You might want to look at the Linux Router Project: http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ which is building a Debian-ish single floppy router. Also, it's worth noting that you can format 3.5'' floppies to contain up to about 2MB, by using bizarre sectors/track settings. This is also mentioned on the LRP page. I will check them out...tho I think I may be back to the NFSroot idea... just need to iron out those details. of course...I can't format 3.5 disks at all now: lenny:~# mke2fs /exports/spin/dev/fd0 mke2fs 1.10, 24-Apr-97 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 95/08/09 end_request: I/O error, dev 02:00, sector 0 mke2fs: Device not configured while trying to determine filesystem size hmm...I havn't tried much off floppies (excpet the base install) since I droppe dthis machine... -STeve -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Base system tarball Q [XTerminal]
I have been tossinbg around the idea of using Linux to take a small PC (like a P100 or a 486) and setting it up as a glorified X Terminal. I decided that since debian is clean, and what I use...I will base it on debian. I want to be able to have the system be diskless, and get its entire running filesystem through NFS (that might be too slow? but maybe not?) I figure for this I will need to roo tthe filesystem on NFS...not a problem :). anyway here was the idea and wehat ties into the subject: for a base to start with I make a directory /exports/xterm Then I untar the base tarball from hamm disks-i386 into it. This gives me a nice base system to start with...I have some problems though. Ok I found out there is no resolv.conf (duh I know..that gets created by a script when I configure the network...which obviously never happens) I also found out that I hafta do a chroot . bash --login once to get it to configure the base system (ie keymap stuff) I also found out that once I do that and do a chroot . bash --login I can install apt, and use dpkg/apt to my hearts content...I actually have a functioning system to start with! (and with tht chroot environment its almost like being on the new machine. Still working on setting up X) Anyway...I am not terribly fammiliar with the base system, and I know it is not made to be installed in this way, is there anything I should watch out for? does this sound like a plan? On first inspection the base system looks great, and this method should allow me to just chroot and goto work with dpkg if I need to upgrade... but is there something I am missing on my first inspection? I was even thinking it woul dbe nice to be able to take this system and break it down a bit (once its together) and intgrate it with debian so that it would be trivial for someone else with a debian system to add suport for this type of Poor Man's X Terminal (That is BTW the title of the document I am writing up on how I am doin gthis) -Steve -- ** Stephen Carpenter ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Maturity is often more absurd than youth and very frequently is most unjust to youth -- Thomas Edison pgpZ5yREExekU.pgp Description: PGP signature
xftp: in main but no source??
I noticed xftp on the WNPP as being orphaned, and it is a program that I have used and sort of like (but always thought it could use some work) xftp, so I thought I would grab the source. xftp is in main in both hamm and slink, but the source code is nowhere to be found! I looked in hamm, I looked in slink, I looked in bo, no source! I even tooka quick look in non-free and contrib (which would be weird since the binary is in main) Is this a bug against the package? I would like to take a look at the source (see what it is writen in...see if it is over my head completly). Also would like to fix some issues I have with it... any ideas on it? what happend to the source? -Steve -- ** Stephen Carpenter ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** I am an agnostic; I do not pretend to know what many ignorant men are sure of. -- Clarance Darrow pgplNn8CH6zF6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: xftp: in main but no source??
On Wed, Jun 17, 1998 at 09:42:39AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jun 17, 1998 at 12:41:28AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I noticed xftp on the WNPP as being orphaned, and it is a program that I have used and sort of like (but always thought it could use some work) xftp, so I thought I would grab the source. xftp is in main in both hamm and slink, but the source code is nowhere to be found! Wrong. # dpkg --print-avail xftp | grep -i source Source: moxftp ahh...I never knew a package could have 1 name for its source and another for its package name. I knew the Real Name of it was moxftp but I figured that the name would be the same for the source...oh well... silly me thanx for the info (and the cool dpkg command...never tried that one) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#23457 acknowledged by developer (xexec is not present in menus!)
On Mon, Jun 15, 1998 at 08:27:47AM -0500, Zed Pobre wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On Mon, 15 Jun 1998, Francesco Potorti` wrote: Look again. It's under XShells, and has been since 0.0.3-4. I do not see it in my wmaker menu. I also looked under /etc/X11 in some window manager's menus, but none of them contains references to xexec under the xshells menu. This is odd. It certainly shows up in olvwm, which is the WM used on the compilation system. In the source package, the debian/menu file is still present in the most recent version and has the contents: ?package(splay):needs=X11 section=XShells\ ^^^ This looks suspicous to me I read the documentation on the Menu Package a while back. should xexec depend on splay to have a menu? The menu package chacks to see if the package named in ?package() to see if that is installed and does NOT show the menu if that is not. Is package splay installed on his machine? is it installed on the machine it works on? try changing it to ?package(local.splay) and see if that fixes it (according to the docs using local. make menu assume thta it is installed) it looks like it SHOULD PROPERLY be ?package(xexec) NOT ?package(splay) -Steve PS remember to run update-menus after making the change -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: VI reasons (was Re: Base Set: Suggested additions removals.)
On Sun, Jun 14, 1998 at 10:27:52AM -0400, Z-Y [Jerry] wrote: greet all, I am no guru. But let's stop this war! yes...wars are unproductive..and in the case of this type of war doesn't even have the benefit of getting rid of some people off the planet. To me, choice of editor depends on your experience, skill and task on hand. I use vi and my boss at work uses emacs. We both like our own choice very much and enjoy the way our choice works for us. But we never try to convert each other, fortunately. I agree tottally. Personally..my favoprite editor right now is ee. I use it all the time. It is not that I am Unwilling to learn, in fact I love to learn, its just I feel that using an editor isn't something that I should need to learn. Some people like emacs (I used to love it...don't use it as much now), some like ae, some like ee, some like vi (I usually call those people masochists... but only in fun ;) ) as for the base...I agree with the point of using ae or ee or some such simple editor. Make it easy for people comming from windows to get started if they wish to learn vi later..so be it, but not everyone can just Pick up vi and run with it like some of the other editors. For the experience of being converted to something else, if you are a buddist, try being converted by a Christian or vice versa. If you don't believe in any form of god, you are free to choose one or create your own:-) hmm nice point. Tried Chrstian, didn't fit me..now im in that 3rd group... did try creating my own...didn't work out. I only have 2 followers now.. and they aren't very good ones. Actually...maybe wiseass is a better term than Follower or Worshipper have a peaceful sunday. too late for that...oh well... Jerry On Sun, 14 Jun 1998, Raul Miller wrote: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Most features? *VI*? or you mean XEmacs? Since when has vi been an editor with features? ;-) The biggest advantage of vi over xemacs is that vi is easier on the wrists. For example, vi's . command (repeat last command which changed the text) is something that doesn't make much sense in the xemacs environment (because you can always type ^x( command ^x) then ^x^e..., and a command to replace . would be about as many keystrokes). At one point, I almost had to give up programming because my wrists hurt so bad. Switching to vi from emacs (and taking better care of myself) mostly solved that. -- Raul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] YU, Zhongbin (Jerry) In Nature I believe:-) - M.S. in CIS | M.S. in Chemistry [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~zyu RA w/ Dr. Ramesh | Tel: (404)251-9072 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ** Stephen Carpenter ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Maturity is often more absurd than youth and very frequently is most unjust to youth -- Thomas Edison pgpaSTunnM56n.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Propersel for standerd configuration system.
On Fri, Jun 12, 1998 at 12:23:28AM -0400, Kevin Atkinson wrote: One of the major problems with unix is that, for new users, it is a bear to configure. I definitly agree (and am glad im not one of those new users). In fact most new things that one has never configured before take a while to figure out and do...the upshot however is that you can learn allot from it. It would consist of these parts: ok - A server back end which would manage the master and users registry of configuration ewwwyuk...gee I wish I hadn't read this right before lunch time lost my appitite now... (Read: This feature is one of the Top 10 reasons I switched to linux) - An easy to use API in C, C++, Perl, Java, Sh, and just about another other language that a unix program or script can be written in. APIs, when well written are always nice to have :) The actual data will be store in a binary format that is specific to the server. However the server will be able to export and import configurations in a standard text based format. sounds like a nightmare. Ok lets see...something happnes to the registry.. (maybe it gets deleted or becomes somehow unreadable)...I loose the configs for EVERYTHING. Should the registry editor stop working (maybe part of the reg is corrupted, any reason) I have no recource but to wipe it all out and re-install (okill just pull out the tape backup...but not everyone has a tape backup and I don't enjoy NEEDing to restore) It would HAVE to be able to fit on a rescue disk (along with all of the other tools which already HAVE to be on it) So what do you think of this idea? As you can see I don't like it. I could however see writing a library or some sort of interface that programs can use. This would take the burden of writting a parser and working out the more exact details of the configuration file off of the designer of the application, and place it on the library. This would allow the library to basically do whatyou say (make a database of configurations and provide and interface for changin gthem) but...it would also allow the library to do it right (well... RIGHT as in what _I_ think is right..which is of course right). It could take care of the details of parsing and writting a config file. This would put all conifg files ofprograms which use it into a standard format. The advantages: 1) It would be easier to write programs that configure programs. All they would have to do is know what variables exist, and what legal values are. The actual format of the file would eb un-important (I would imaging that that is a stu,bling block for writting programs that configure a wide range of applications as each on emay have a subtly differnt format) 2) It would allow an administrator to repair the system the same as they always have. 3) The files all using a standard format would make editing files by hand easier as one doesn't have to think Ok...in this file can I use tabs? (etc) 4) For those who want better performance and don't care about editing by hand it would not be a problem to use a binary database instead of text files. of course you have to convince everyone that your system is good and worth them using in their programs (unless you intend to edit them yourself :) ) but...thats the same for any system. When trying to decide between two vastly differnt systems of doing things always pick niether and steal the best of both ways :) As for this library...I might even be willing to work on such a thing... I do wish to experient with config files and parsing etc... -Steve -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Propersel for standerd configuration system.
On Fri, Jun 12, 1998 at 12:29:41PM -0400, Kevin Atkinson wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 1998 at 12:23:28AM -0400, Kevin Atkinson wrote: Second off data will be regually exported to text based backup files (say like every hour) so if something goes wrong it can easilly read the text based file to fix the corrupted parts. hmm this sounds good at first...but has some problems. First: What if the configuration error or orruption takes more than an hour (or even more than a day) before it is noticed? it could start dumping off corrupt data (depending on whether or not it notices the corruption) second: seems execcive So what do you think of this idea? As you can see I don't like it. I could however see writing a library or some sort of interface that programs can use. This would take the burden of writting a parser and working out the more exact details of the configuration file off of the designer of the application, and place it on the library. This would allow the library to basically do whatyou say (make a database of I really just should not have mentioned the windows registry as most people hate it. not most peoplejust those people who know of it and have had to deal with it :) However what I was thinking off would is exactly what you are thinking off. There will just be a server running where programs can talk to to change their configuration. Thats not exactly what I was thinking of...I was thinking litterally of a library. just the code to do it in a nice dynamically linkable library. I don't see the need for a server running...those chores would best be handled by some other utility which uses the API. SUing an actual server for this seems like major overkill to me. However it can also translate things to in from the old fashion configuration files so that applications don't have to use the library if they don't wants to. well thats the nice thing about the library...all you have to do is update the library, and use a utility to dump the old configs back through it... and presto...your using a new file format.. ALL programs which use the library would automatically use the new one. Ya know...while I think that the registry, database, and server are all overkill in their own way...I am almost surprized that such a library has never been written. I mean, think how many programs need to parse a config file? (btw HAS someone written such a library? if so I have never heard of it) -Steve -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with the undead (zombies)
On Sun, Jun 07, 1998 at 11:03:35PM +0200, Gergely Madarasz wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jun 1998, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jun 1998, Brandon Mitchell wrote:
More incentive to do it in a signal handler, tested code:
void sig_handler (int i) {
if (i == SIGCHLD) { /* signal based reaper */
while (wait3(NULL, WNOHANG, 0) 0);
}
}
The man pages do not say that wait is signal safe, putting it in a single
handler could nuke your program in some situations.
Hmm... isn't signal(SIGCHLD,SIG_IGN) the best for this situation anyway?
Yes it isI did it and it worked...
what I find weird is this...
When i checked teh documentation it says that By Default SIGCHLD is ignored
(well basically im paraphrasing..it was probably part of a table, but it
was in more than one doc)
However zombies are still made...yet..if you use signal(SIGCHLD,SIG_IGN) that
gets rid fo them. I find this weird..maybe the book (or was it in aman page?)
was wrong..or rather..in-precise when it listed SIGCHLD as ignored because
by 1 standard it _IS_ ignored as in, if there is no signal handler for it
then nothing special is done (like dumping core). Perhaps they meant
ignored only in this sense and not in the sense of ignored as in you told
the system that you will ignore this signal
I realize now this is pretty elementary (I knew it was but I couldn't for the
life of me, when I first asked, remember where I read about it) but...
seems to still be a point of confusion.
once again thanx for the info
-Steve
--
Madarasz Gergely [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's practically impossible to look at a penguin and feel angry.
Egy pingvinre gyakorlatilag lehetetlen haragosan nezni.
HuLUG: http://www.cab.u-szeged.hu/local/linux/
--
** Stephen Carpenter ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Maturity is often more absurd than youth and very frequently is most
unjust to youth
-- Thomas Edison
pgpTHHmoP99fY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Problems with the undead (zombies)
On Sun, Jun 07, 1998 at 11:07:47AM -0700, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote: Stephen == Stephen Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Stephen I was hacking around on xfstt earlier today. Neat. I packed up the ttf files from the Windows[1] that came with my Laptop, and am going to try them with `xfstt' after I get Debian 2.0 installed on it. :-) as some pointed out xfstt might be abit of a memory hog (maybe a leak) but.. it does work nice with Windows fonts and makes Nutscrape look nice. Stephen This SEEMS to work fine (I havn't really given it a good Stephen test -YET) except when I connect and then Stephen disconnect...the child exists (via _exit(0)) after the Stephen client disconnects. The problem is that the child then Stephen become a zombie. Stephen I installed a signal handler for SIGCHLD which does Stephen nothing what should I do? how can I make th eparent clean Stephen up its little zombie children? You can tell it to `IGN' SIGCHLD, and get automatic reaping, if I remember right. Yes I found that in a book..it worked...as I said in anothe rmessagem, I was confused by the terminology of some docs using ignore to mean 2 differnt things (1 being no action is taken like dumping core or stopping execution of you rprogram, 2 being actually telling the system ignore this) Read `man wait', `man sigaction', and any xrefs you find there. The `info libc' is very good. You can use `M-x info-look' in emacs, with the cursor on a symbol, and it will go and find the documentation on the symbol in the info. I will have to check it out, thanx for the tip :) Buy, beg, borrow, or steal a copy of W. Richard Stevens' Advanced Programming in the Unix Environment. It covers signal handling, and lots more. hmmm I supose I can buy a copy...I had seen that book on a shelf at Microcenter and considered it...now that I have heard this good review I guess I will buy it (I will try begging them for it, but I doubt they will give it to me just for my looks and sob story...and stealing it...well Im just not into that) Footnotes: [1] I also snagged the `monitor*.inf' files; so I can get the scan rate for my lcd panel laptop display. I wonder if it's legal to run a perl processor on that and convert it to an XFree86 compatible monitor database, then distribute it? Sounds interesting...if you can figure it out go for it :) The problem is I have one of those for my monitor and...it is sorta hard to figure out I thought... but I supose they do have the info (BTW it might be better to just distribute the prog for doing it...that way people can do it with new monitors they get) -Steve -- ** Stephen Carpenter ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Maturity is often more absurd than youth and very frequently is most unjust to youth -- Thomas Edison -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with the undead (zombies)
On Fri, Jun 05, 1998 at 06:26:21PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: This turned out to be almost trivial...simply a few mods, instead of servicing requests after connect, it fork()s and lets the child service that connection while the parent loops and waits fo rthe next connect. [I think I changed 10 lines of code total] Yeah, but this means each seperate xfstt instance does not share it's bitmap/metric caches, root 509 0.0 35.4 99640 22428 ? S May 15 0:44 /usr/bin/X11/xfstt I'd hate to have more than one of those monsters around! Incedently, I think xfstt has a memory leak. 99M of ram is a bit high. yikes..thats possible I guess...hmmm well as of yet I havn't looked terribly much at the code...just bits and pieces...there is allot of code to the whole thing... hmm if I run top and sort by memory usage xfstt comes in second on the list (right behind XF86_S3V) doesn't seem to be getting bigger tho for me BTW what vcersion of xfstt is that? I am running th elatest (from slink...well ok from my own system...which is now the one in slink..but you get the point ;) ) well hopefully tonight I will be stress testing this with some people I know...ill see what it does to the system to be using such a scheme for serving multiple connections. I am using fork() simply because the code was not written with multiple connections in mind...I think adding suport any other way might need a major re-writetho in time...maybe something can eb done ;) one of my goals in packaging this and working with it is to learn and extend my own knowledge...so...time to dive into it (now that I have a few free mins to do so) To fix your zombie problem you should IGNORE sigchld or arrange for wait to be called (but not in the signal handler) ahh not call wait() in the signal handler...I was just now about to tackle this problem...hmm unfortunatly im not sure where other than the signal handler to call wait...hmm maybe ignore is better solution..ill try it ok...according to my book it is ignored by default? I don't understand why these zombies are made then? maybe I will just add a wait to main loop so it will just perform cleanup eveytime a new connection is made? oh well..I will play with it. as for why it takes up so much memory -Steve -- ** Stephen Carpenter ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Maturity is often more absurd than youth and very frequently is most unjust to youth -- Thomas Edison -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New Project: COPYRIGHT HOWTO.
On Wed, Jun 03, 1998 at 11:25:12PM +0200, Jens Ritter wrote: Hallo all, as a lot of us developers have to deal with copyright problems, I would like to start this (hopefully) littly project. This sounds like an interesting idea. I would like to write a COPYRIGHT HOWTO, which might be send to authors of software, which a) do not state what copyright is associated with their software and b) who do not use a free (enough) license. What should be in there: 1. A discussion what is necessary to constitute a Copyright and License for a program (Do you have to state copyright in every file, is a COPYRIGHT file in the top directory enough, is a Copyright line in an LSM file enough, etc.). This all sounds good...and as being associated with debian I understand your focus on free software licenses, and I definitly myself feel that free software licences are far superior. I think what needs to be included is also info about non-free licences. It would be good to see a nice guide...what needs to be spelled out explicitly in a licence? what is assumed true as long as nothing explicitly states otherwise? etc Information on both free and non-free licences is important...it should be usefull for everyone. It woul dbe nice to see some example licences and what they mean, and espcially their pitfalls (like for instance some peopel find they don't like the GPL cuz its not free enough for them) _4._ Big disclaimer, as we are not lawyers. :-) This is of course good...and probably necissary (I have often wondered if such disclaimers are really needed or just the result of peoples misguided paranoia) I think it woul dbe nice to write it and then find a way to have a copyright lawyer who is willing to help out read it over and give it aquick check for the validity of its statements. I think it is important to stress a licence which is carefully worded such that it allows and dissalows what the author wishes to do so with, and also is not complete overkill (for instance I think the GPL is a good example of overkill) Also I think Public Domain should be mentioned...and what it means to place something in the public domain (my understanding is that that means a person who writes a piece of software explicitly gives up all rights to it which a copyright would give them) -Steve -- ** Stephen Carpenter ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Maturity is often more absurd than youth and very frequently is most unjust to youth -- Thomas Edison pgpGvOGGOReP9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: bug #21739 - xfstt -- comments?
On Mon, May 04, 1998 at 10:56:43PM +, Rev. Joseph Carter wrote: On Mon, May 04, 1998 at 11:28:20AM -0400, Stephen Carpenter wrote: I have been working on the xfstt package to take it over. Until a few days ago there was only one bug of Wishlist priority filed against it which is now ready to close as soon as I am able to upload files (ie am finished registering as a debian package maintainer et al) It now makes a pid file in var run like a good little deamon and can be started and stoped form a scipt in /etc/init.d however this new bug has been reported...and I am looking for comments about how to fix this one. Cool.. I haven't even looked at the source to this thing so I don't know if it can be done, but Mozilla can't tell any TTfonts are fixed width.. I didn't file a bug report because I don't know that it's something that is Mozilla, xfstt, both, or if it could be fixed.. hmm an interesting question since I don't even have mozzilaa... (I have the source but...not compiled yet) it really could be either...tho... I hafta look through the xfstt docs again (I am still familiarizing myself with the code...the few changes I made were no-brainer things like making apid file and deleting it) it COULD be a problem with xfstt but...likely it is not a bug but a limitation imposed by factors beyond its direct control (it has a few quirks like that)...ill keep it in mind tho when I poke around ..thanx for the info The new bug states the xfstt keeping the true type fonts in /var/ttfonts is a violation of both the FHS and the FSSTND snip what would be a good directory for them? I'd agree with the upstream author and use /usr/lib/X11R6/fonts/ttf probably. am agreeing with him too to some extent...I do wanna look around abit more it seems (from my cursory look over the standards) that they make some big exceptions for X11 itself and treat it special because it is the biggest single package commonly used... it may be that even that is no tthe best place and Xjust keeps it there because It is X and we make excpetions for X :) anyway...I think ill sit back a bit and wait until I can upload what I have then I think I will take a week and mull over this a bit (print out and read over the standrads again...whatever did happen to my pretty little binder with the FHS...) this bug doesn't break anything...no other package should take a nutty or not install because of it...so it is not so urgent that i wanna rush and screw it up (the xfstt source is already hacked up enough ;)...) Although...I do disagree a bit with the idea of it going under /usr at all...because xfstt writes to the ttfonts directories to store some info abou tthe currently 8installed fonts... like I said..this one will (as the guy at the help desk says when I bring him a really AFU DWO) require some thought -Steve pgpyY6OhQD3nK.pgp Description: PGP signature
