Hello,
Ludovic Courtès, le sam. 15 déc. 2018 23:10:39 +0100, a ecrit:
> Any particular reason why this patch hasn’t made it upstream?
Most probably the answer is "nobody took the time to polish the patch
and run the glibc test with it and say s⋅he did".
Samuel
Ludovic Courtès skribis:
> 137<--176(pid8674)->dir_lookup ("proc/self/exe" 65 0) = 0 1 "self/exe"
> 191<--190(pid8674)
> 191<--190(pid8674)->dir_lookup ("self/exe" 65 0) = 0 3 "pid/exe" (null)
Looking more closely, I found that we’re missing FS_RETRY_MAGICAL
support for “pid” in hurd/lo
Hello hacker herd!
The attached C code reads /proc/self/exe. I tested it on darnassus in
two contexts:
1. Natively compiled with the Debian toolchain available on darnassus;
2. Cross-built with the GNU toolchain (which includes stock
glibc 2.28) found in Guix, statically-linked.
#1 wo
Can you add a new FAQ about 64 bit support?
Or, if exists, modify It to add this link
https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/open_issues/64-bit_port.html
El sáb., 15 dic. 2018 a las 17:37, escribió:
>
> This week, I've tried to split up my commits into individual patches.
>
>
> Patch 1) I changed th
This week, I've tried to split up my commits into individual patches.
Patch 1) I changed the command to start the hurd "kvm" -> "qemu-system-i386"
Patch 2) I removed the mention of the ufs partition type in the old
Hurd FAQ. I will eventually attempt to merge all the FAQs
