Why does X have multi-thread support disabled by default?
Quite a few programs (e.g. freeamp) give nasty Xlib: unexpected async
reply errors due to making X calls from more than one thread.
Now that threads and libc_r are part of the system (and have been for a
while), perhaps Xlibs should be
Dean Lombardo scribbled this message on May 16:
Why does X have multi-thread support disabled by default?
Quite a few programs (e.g. freeamp) give nasty Xlib: unexpected async
reply errors due to making X calls from more than one thread.
Now that threads and libc_r are part of the system
What a cool idea.
Maybe we'll see a FreeBSD/USENIX conference on-deck someday.
There was a very successful EUUG conference held on the Stockholm -
Helsinki Ferry some years ago...
but those things have to do with alchool restrictions/high tax in
some nordic country, isn't it ?
John-Mark Gurney wrote:
Dean Lombardo scribbled this message on May 16:
Why does X have multi-thread support disabled by default?
Quite a few programs (e.g. freeamp) give nasty Xlib: unexpected async
reply errors due to making X calls from more than one thread.
Now that threads and
On Sun, May 16, 1999 at 08:14:37AM +0100, Dean Lombardo wrote:
Why does X have multi-thread support disabled by default?
Quite a few programs (e.g. freeamp) give nasty Xlib: unexpected async
reply errors due to making X calls from more than one thread.
Now that threads and libc_r are part of the
John Birrell scribbled this message on May 16:
John-Mark Gurney wrote:
Dean Lombardo scribbled this message on May 16:
Why does X have multi-thread support disabled by default?
Quite a few programs (e.g. freeamp) give nasty Xlib: unexpected async
reply errors due to making X calls
John-Mark Gurney wrote:
yes, but this is what compiling Xlib with threading support is suppose
to fix this so that you don't have problems... I haven't exactly looked
at what the threading support DOES for Xlib though, but I did manage
to make it so that XInitThreads() would return true, but I
On Sat, May 15, 1999 at 12:12:29PM -0700, Justin C. Walker wrote:
It seems there's a need, and the possibility. Would somebody like to
suggest a syntax?
The precedent would be the socket ioctls SIOCGIFHWADDR and
SIOCSIFHWADDR. The Linux emulator suppors the get-only version
overloaded for this, no? The driver could fail the request if it
didn't support it; or if it has run out of slots for aliases. There
should also be (I think) a way to tell the driver to go to
promiscuous mode to emulate this (an I really want this request?),
but I'm not sure it
On Sat, May 15, 1999 at 12:26:37AM -0700, Steve Rubin wrote:
This is not how Etherchannel works. Anyone from cisco here care to explain
better than I possibly could?
On Fri, May 14, 1999 at 08:28:55PM -0700, John Milford wrote:
You have to have the capibility on the switch, and
Fun. Fun. Fun. I am trying to port some software to a system with
only gmake and the makefile uses bmake-style conditionals. Is there a good
way to convert the conditionals? Here is the offender:
.ifmake fastcgi
DEFINES += -DFASTCGI
CFLAGS+=-I$(FCGIINCLUDEDIR)
.endif
I really
Jim Carroll wrote:
I was wondering if anyone has done any work on fsck and very large file
systems. We have a system that has 126 GB RAID Array. As you can imagine,
fsck chokes trying to alloc enough blocks to store it's internal data
structures (128 MB RAM, 128 MB Swap)
On Sat, May 15, 1999 at 12:26:37AM -0700, Steve Rubin wrote:
This is not how Etherchannel works. Anyone from cisco here care to explain
better than I possibly could?
On Fri, May 14, 1999 at 08:28:55PM -0700, John Milford wrote:
You have to have the capibility on the switch, and
Yes Etherchannel uses some other mechanism to balance the load.
Its acually worse :)
Cisco Etherchannel requires the device attached to speak a special protocol
to keep things working. You can not just take any system, put 2 NIC's in it
plug it into a cisco switch, and expect it to work. It
On Thu, Apr 08, 1999 at 02:53:00PM -0400, Kelly Yancey wrote:
Fun. Fun. Fun. I am trying to port some software to a system with
only gmake and the makefile uses bmake-style conditionals. Is there a good
way to convert the conditionals? Here is the offender:
Not sure. It might be simpler to
On Sat, May 15, 1999 at 01:48:23AM +0100, Nik Clayton wrote:
Didn't Knuth say I've only proven TeX to be correct, I haven't tested
it or some such?
That's a quote in /usr/src/games/fortune/datfiles/fortunes:
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it.
The programmer's resource at http://www.wotsit.org has been updated again.
I apologise for the lack of update E-mails recently, I have now implemented
the update list in a different way which should make the process work better.
18 files have been added or modified in the last 7 days, use the
My character device driver receives a pointer to a user data buffer in the
user's address space. I need to DMA those data. For this, I need to bring
the pages into memory and lock them before initiating the DMA.
My book tells about physio(). However, I found it unconvenient for me.
One
From: adr...@freebsd.org
Date: 1999-05-16 04:59:51 -0700
To: Bernd Walter ti...@cicely.de
Subject: Re: ifconfig: changing mac address
Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
In-reply-to: Your message of Sun, 16 May 1999 11:48:42
+0200.19990516114842.a48...@cicely8.cicely.de
Delivered-to:
Should I actually think about changes to make, or should I simply hold off
and let more experienced kernel hackers take care of the fixes?
If you have the time and motivation to produce changes, please do indeed
do so. You'll achieve best results by establishing a relationship with
one or
-Original Message-
From: Mike Smith m...@smith.net.au
Date: Sunday, May 16, 1999 3:08 PM
My character device driver receives a pointer to a user data buffer in
the
user's address space. I need to DMA those data. For this, I need to bring
the pages into memory and lock them before
It seems there's a need, and the possibility. Would somebody like to
suggest a syntax?
The precedent would be the socket ioctls SIOCGIFHWADDR and
SIOCSIFHWADDR. The Linux emulator suppors the get-only version
already.
It's already been mentioned that some adapters
Joe Abley jab...@clear.co.nz wrote:
I compiled the 1.1 client for FreeBSD3.1 -- what seems to be the
problem with it? [It seemed to work ok for me, but I admit I didn't
test it very exhaustively].
I'm running it on a P166 box running 3.1, and it's running quite
happily.
As an aside:
I
Alex Le Heux writes:
Maybe I'm completely wrong here, but didn't I read somewhere that with
softupdates it would theoretically be possible to boot the system before
the fsck and fsck while it's running?
Yes.. if you make the assumptions that:
1. There are no bugs in the soft updates code
On Sun, 16 May 1999, Archie Cobbs wrote:
Alex Le Heux writes:
Maybe I'm completely wrong here, but didn't I read somewhere that with
softupdates it would theoretically be possible to boot the system before
the fsck and fsck while it's running?
Yes.. if you make the assumptions that:
I dug through the archives and found peopel with similiar problems to
what I am experiencing, but I didn't find any answers that have worked
for me. Here are the problem I am having:
1: The built-in SCSI ROM is v2.01, there was mention of BIOS 1008 including
2.11. I applied the 1008 flash
[moved to -hackers]
On Sunday, 16 May 1999 at 23:03:11 -0500, Mike Heffner wrote:
I would like to trace the source of a panic during boot time. How do I compile
the boot loader code in DEBUG mode? I tried defining DEBUG with make, but it
didn't work. What's the _right_ way to compile specific
27 matches
Mail list logo
