Linux-Development-Sys Digest #368
Linux-Development-Sys Digest #368, Volume #8 Thu, 21 Dec 00 11:13:13 EST
Contents:
Re: PANIC: C++ in Kernel Module gives strange version error! (Rui Antunes)
Re: Compiling C++ programs with GCC --> no GPL license implications (Nix)
Re: Do "Lions' Commentary on UNIX" good for knowing unix kernal? (Josef Moellers)
How can I find out the implementing of a system function? (From China ;-))
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Intel Easy PC camera - cannot be supported in Linux! (jtnews)
Re: How can I find out the implementing of a system function? (From China ;-))
(Andreas Jaeger)
Re: Char device drivers and mknod ("Satis Loire")
Re: [OT] Re: Compiling C++ programs with GCC --> no GPL license implications
(Stefaan A Eeckels)
Problem in installing ethernet driver module ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Zombie processes? (marian)
Re: [OT] Re: Compiling C++ programs with GCC --> no GPL license implications (Isaac)
Re: Compiling C++ programs with GCC --> no GPL license implications ("Peter T.
Breuer")
Problems with sigaction ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rui Antunes)
Subject: Re: PANIC: C++ in Kernel Module gives strange version error!
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 12:01:59 GMT
You were right. I found out (well, someone else told me) that the
problem is that g++ has a bug that simply makes it impossible to
define kernel_version simply by including or
.
It must be declared in a C file, compiled with gcc and afterwards
linked to the C++ obj...
Thanks!,
Rui Antunes
On Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:59:48 +0100, "O.Petzold"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> However, when I insmod'ed it I got a slap in the face:
>> $ insmod tmp_module.o
>> tmp_module.o: couldn't find the kernel version the module was
>> compiled for
>>
>> Why?!? (when I used no C++ code it worked fine!)
>
>Why? - I have no idea. Two ways are possible, The first compile
>one of your c++ source with included and defined MODULE
>(best would be where init/cleanup_module is) with -O0 (zero) !
>The other write an empty c-file:
># more kversion.c
>8<---
>/* -*- C -*- ***
> * $Id: $
> *
> * DESCRIPTION: the module version info
> *
> * Copyright (C) 2000 O.Petzold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> */
>
>/** get the kernel version string */
>#include
>#include
>
>>8---
>and you will get the symbols as well. Therfore you have to compile the
>other
>sources with the __NO_VERSION__ define.
>
>It seems, that the g++ compiler is more hungry than the gcc. Maybee it's
>related with the extern "C" statement. No idea.
>
>Regards
>Olaf
>
>
--
From: Nix <$}xinix{$@esperi.demon.co.uk>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.c++,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Compiling C++ programs with GCC --> no GPL license implications
Date: 21 Dec 2000 07:37:24 +
On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, Mike Stump yowled:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Stefaan A Eeckels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I'm now seriously worried about being hit by a stray meteorite.
>
> And you're more likely to be hit today by that meteorite, because you
> weren't hit yesterday. :-)
Ah yes; probability theory according to the UK educational system.
(Many years ago my secondary school teacher tried to tell us that this
was how probabilities worked. Easily refutable since dice, radioactive
sources, metorites and the like are not precognitive ;) )
--
Not speaking for Boskone at the moment.
--
From: Josef Moellers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.programmer,comp.os.linux.development
Subject: Re: Do "Lions' Commentary on UNIX" good for knowing unix kernal?
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 15:12:28 +0100
Daniel Rall wrote:
> =
> Josef Moellers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Although it is a tad outdated, yes, it is a good introduction to UN*X=
> > kernel internals. OTOH I have also seen a book much like the Lion's,
> > based on Linux: "Linux Core Kernel Commentary" by Scott Maxwell
> > (CoriolisOpen Press, ISBN 1-57610-469-9). I have inherited the book f=
rom
> > a colleague who has left the department but, so far, I have not looke=
d
> > through it, so I can't judge whether it is of any use.
> >
> > Of course, Joe Humrickhouse's recommendations are good books, too.
> =
> The "Linux Core Kernel Commentary" is interesting, but already sorely
> out of date.
Given the relative speed of development, any commented kernel source is
bound
Linux-Development-Sys Digest #368
Linux-Development-Sys Digest #368, Volume #6 Tue, 2 Feb 99 22:14:08 EST
Contents:
Re: Advice: NT Service vs. Linux Daemon??? Which is easier? ("Sascha Bohnenkamp")
Re: BeOS and Linux (Tim Smith)
Re: Internal PCI modem (Rob Clark)
Re: Saving Machine State ("Jens-U. Mozdzen")
Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows (Bulent Murtezaoglu)
Re: Ignorant Socalists (was disheartened gnome developer) (Alexander Viro)
What's the best way to do process communication ? (Markus Kohler)
Re: Ignorant Socalists (was disheartened gnome developer) (John Hasler)
Re: use theramin as input device (John Hasler)
Linux apps in win2000 port news! (M Sweger)
Re: New free widget library: Notif-0.1 (Peter Samuelson)
Re: New free widget library: Notif-0.1 (Frank Hale)
Re: Easy(?) kernel question. (Frank Hale)
Re: Modest next goal for Linux (bill davidsen)
Re: Ignorant Socalists (was disheartened gnome developer) (Marco Anglesio)
Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows (jedi)
svgatextmode + riva128 = ? (Andrew Lee)
Re: Newbe tar question (Karl Heyes)
Re: Modest next goal for Linux (bill davidsen)
Re: why does `stat' make the disk spin? (Marc Slemko)
Re: Ignorant Socalists (was disheartened gnome developer) (jedi)
From: "Sascha Bohnenkamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advice: NT Service vs. Linux Daemon??? Which is easier?
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 16:10:08 +0100
*snip*
>words, which is easier to write (with an http server as an example): a
>Linux daemon or an NT service. My current knowledge of the MS WinNT
platform is
>somewhat better than my unix/Linux knowledge.
well a linux (unix-) daemon is very easy to write ... get a good book
(Advanced Programming in the Unix Environment) and do it ...
>Btw, does anyone write anything is just plain C anymore, or is everything
>pretty much done with C++?
most services are done with c ... but well why not use c++ ...
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: BeOS and Linux
Date: 2 Feb 1999 06:11:22 -0800
Arthur Chiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>BeOS supports state of the art hardware technology. Linux is a few steps behind.
The hardware listed at www.be.com, at least for the Intel version, seems to be
a subset of what Linux supports. Where is Linux behind Be?
--Tim Smith
--
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Internal PCI modem
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob Clark)
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 00:12:11 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Donato Marrazzo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What about "HCF" modem as the mine?
>Can i hope?
>
>Robert Krawitz ha scritto:
>
>> Yup, that statement makes it a Winmodem. "HSP" means "Host Signal
>> Processing".
HCF is a Winmodem, too. A different kind of winmodem, but still a
winmodem.
Sorry :(
Rob Clark, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html
--
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 16:00:50 +0100
From: "Jens-U. Mozdzen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Saving Machine State
Bill Reh wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I would like to know if there's any way to save my machine state, ie save my
> kcore and swap file and restore them after rebooting, or something to that
> effect.
> [...]
Bill,
on the apmd home page there is a reference to a patch for the 2.2.x
kernels:
http://falcon.sch.bme.hu/~seasons/linux/swsusp.html
Note this stuff is marked ALPHA (pre-beta), and that you're using it at
your own risk :-)
Regards
Jens
--
Jens-U. Mozdzen, Netzdesign und -entwicklung | email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Schleswiger Damm 200 | phone & fax
++49-40-5595175
D-22457 Hamburg, Germany |
--
From: Bulent Murtezaoglu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows
Date: 02 Feb 1999 18:32:35 -0500
No I'm not dumping Linux, thought this would get people's attention.
I am presently running NT as my desktop with an X server for my
various headless Linux/Unix machines in my basement. Works reasonably well,
but I would like to dump NT completely (minor instability, lack of
APM, it's tieing up a PPro for mostly being an Xterminal, not to
mention the inability to do sound thru X). One application I have to
have that does not seem to exist for Linux is the ability to use a
serial scanner. Presently all my paperwork passes thru a visioneer
paperport. I would consider buying a new scanner if I can get the
equivalent functionality (clickless/automatic scanning and very
compact scanner). I checked the SANE pages, but the
