Stanislav Sedov schrieb:
On Sun, 17 May 2009 14:36:03 +0200
Christoph Mallon mentioned:
Aliasing behavior is stritcly described in
ISO C99 standard, so there's a good point to enforcing strict-aliasing clear
code in our kernel.
If you like this addition because of this reason, I have to disapp
On Sun, 17 May 2009 14:36:03 +0200
Christoph Mallon mentioned:
>
> > Aliasing behavior is stritcly described in
> > ISO C99 standard, so there's a good point to enforcing strict-aliasing clear
> > code in our kernel.
> If you like this addition because of this reason, I have to disappoint
> you
Stanislav Sedov schrieb:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 01 May 2009 14:02:50 +0200
Christoph Mallon mentioned:
[Don't parenthesize return values]
Removed, because it does not improve maintainability in any way.
This change could be made and tested mechanically. But t
Stanislav Sedov schrieb:
On Fri, 01 May 2009 08:20:20 -0600 (MDT)
"M. Warner Losh" mentioned:
It is a debugging aid, but one of dubious value for a far more
fundamental reason:
return;
will break any macro.
You can use variadic marcos in this case if the piece of code debugged
On Fri, 01 May 2009 08:20:20 -0600 (MDT)
"M. Warner Losh" mentioned:
>
> It is a debugging aid, but one of dubious value for a far more
> fundamental reason:
>
> return;
>
> will break any macro.
>
You can use variadic marcos in this case if the piece of code debugged
uses void retu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 01 May 2009 14:02:50 +0200
Christoph Mallon mentioned:
> > [Don't parenthesize return values]
> >> Removed, because it does not improve maintainability in any way.
> >
> > This change could be made and tested mechanically. But there is
> >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 02 May 2009 09:27:51 +0200
Christoph Mallon mentioned:
> I also have to object, that it leads to hunting for declarations.
> Actually it usually reduces scrolling around in the code: Many variables
> are only assigned once. A typical exampl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 01 May 2009 08:12:29 -0600 (MDT)
"M. Warner Losh" mentioned:
>
> This is a religious point, and we're dangerously close to saying my
> religion is better than your religion. I don't like this part of the
> proposal at all. I can see the va
on 01/05/2009 14:56 Maxim Sobolev said the following:
> Christoph Mallon wrote:
>> Roman Divacky schrieb:
>>> I like the part about using as many variables as possible because
>>> of documentation and performance enhancements. I tend to like
>>> the other changes as well..
>>
>> This is not about u
On 2009-Apr-29 12:10:44 -0700, John Gemignani
wrote:
>Are local variables allocated on-the-fly on the stack or does the
>compiler preallocate the space on entry?
This is compiler and optimisation dependent. As a general rule, if a
compiler is not performing any optimisation, it is likely to al
In message: <49fd4391.9070...@gmx.de>
Christoph Mallon writes:
: M. Warner Losh schrieb:
: > In message: <49fcafa2.60...@gmx.de>
: > Christoph Mallon writes:
: > : Julian Elischer schrieb:
: > : >> Christoph Mallon wrote:
: > : K&R code should be changed as part of re
M. Warner Losh schrieb:
In message: <49fcafa2.60...@gmx.de>
Christoph Mallon writes:
: Julian Elischer schrieb:
: >> Christoph Mallon wrote:
: K&R code should be changed as part of related changes if possible.
: A sweep to change a whole file is probably also ok.
: cha
In message: <49fcafa2.60...@gmx.de>
Christoph Mallon writes:
: Julian Elischer schrieb:
: >> Christoph Mallon wrote:
: K&R code should be changed as part of related changes if possible.
: A sweep to change a whole file is probably also ok.
: changing them one at a time i
Julian Elischer schrieb:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
K&R code should be changed as part of related changes if possible.
A sweep to change a whole file is probably also ok.
changing them one at a time is probably not ok.
But this is what actually is practiced.
You still did not answer my question:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
Julian Elischer schrieb:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
Julian Elischer schrieb:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
So at the one hand you argue that hunting things is bad, but at the
same time you prefer it? I am confused.
well, I won't hold your problems against you.. :-)
It i
Julian Elischer schrieb:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
I'm talking about an optimized build - no matter what the style of the
original source was, you will have a hard time debugging it.
but by removing -Ox I can debug it and you can't
Declaring variables earlier does not magically fill meaningful
Julian Elischer schrieb:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
Julian Elischer schrieb:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
So at the one hand you argue that hunting things is bad, but at the
same time you prefer it? I am confused.
well, I won't hold your problems against you.. :-)
It is sad that you are just t
Christoph Mallon wrote:
Julian Elischer schrieb:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
So at the one hand you argue that hunting things is bad, but at the same
time you prefer it? I am confused.
well, I won't hold your problems against you.. :-)
___
freebsd-
Christoph Mallon wrote:
I'm talking about an optimized build - no matter what the style of the
original source was, you will have a hard time debugging it.
but by removing -Ox I can debug it and you can't
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing l
Julian Elischer schrieb:
David Malone wrote:
As I said, the point of a style guide is consistency. Changing it
doesn't promote consistency, so there needs to be a good reason for
the change, rather than a good reason not to change. In my opinion,
there isn't a strong reason. Similarly for parens
Julian Elischer schrieb:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
variables. Sorting them in a beneficial way for space efficiency is
better left to them (and it is a rather trivial thing to do). Also you
cannot control if more spill slots have to be inserted or some values
do not live in memory at all, so onl
Christoph Mallon wrote:
Julian Elischer schrieb:
David Malone wrote:
-Do not put declarations
-inside blocks unless the routine is unusually complicated.
+Prefer declaring loop iterators in the for-statement to limit
their scope.
I usually don't like this style - I like being able to review
David Malone wrote:
As I said, the point of a style guide is consistency. Changing it
doesn't promote consistency, so there needs to be a good reason for
the change, rather than a good reason not to change. In my opinion,
there isn't a strong reason. Similarly for parens around return
values -
Julian Elischer schrieb:
David Malone wrote:
-Do not put declarations
-inside blocks unless the routine is unusually complicated.
+Prefer declaring loop iterators in the for-statement to limit their
scope.
I usually don't like this style - I like being able to review the
variables used in a f
> > I'm not sure I buy this - the initialisation is unlikely to move in
> > a piece of code, so it's as hard to find now as it was before. Editors
> > supporting finding declarations should be able to find initialisations
> > just as easily. (I'm old fashioned and do it via regexps.)
> But why not
David Malone wrote:
FWIW, I'd rarely support changing style(9), unless it is actually
causing people to write bad code. It's designed to produce consistent
code, and changing it does not encourage consistency.
-Do not put declarations
-inside blocks unless the routine is unusually complicated.
David Malone schrieb:
+When the value is not supposed to change in the function, make the
variable
+const.
Using const seems sensible, and a good example of a time where
declaring at initialisation makes sense.
+This makes it easier for a reader to identify the where the value of a
variable
M. Warner Losh schrieb:
In message: <20090501.081229.1359784281@bsdimp.com>
M. Warner Losh writes:
: In message: <49fa8e88.1040...@gmx.de>
: Christoph Mallon writes:
: : M. Warner Losh schrieb:
: : > In message: <20090430233648.ga95...@keira.kiwi-computer.com>
: : >
FWIW, I'd rarely support changing style(9), unless it is actually
causing people to write bad code. It's designed to produce consistent
code, and changing it does not encourage consistency.
> >-Do not put declarations
> >-inside blocks unless the routine is unusually complicated.
> >+Prefer declar
deeptec...@gmail.com schrieb:
Well I agree with the proposed changes.
What about allowing // comments?
These are already widely used. grep shows hundreds of hits in sys/.
Probably a clause should be added to style(9) to allow them
"officially", but not right now.
Christoph
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 09:02:26AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
>
> This is the biggest one, and I think it may be too soon. Also, we
> need to be careful on the initialization side of things because we
> currently have a lot of code that looks like:
>
>
> struct foo *fp;
> struct b
Well I agree with the proposed changes.
What about allowing // comments?
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
M. Warner Losh wrote:
Hunting for declarations sucks
I'd rather hunt a bit for its declaration and find uses of it on the
way, rather than find the declaration..and then what?
This is a religious point, and we're dangerously close to saying my
religion is better than your religion. I don't
M. Warner Losh schrieb:
In message: <49fa8d73.6040...@gmx.de>
Christoph Mallon writes:
: M. Warner Losh schrieb:
: > In message: <20090428114754.gb89...@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
: > Peter Jeremy writes:
: > : >> +.Sh LOCAL VARIABLES
: > :
: > : >Last, but definitely not
On Fri, 1 May 2009, Christoph Mallon wrote:
Daniel Eischen schrieb:
+1 for leaving style(9) alone.
Have you looked at all the proposed changes? I ask to consider them
individually.
Point taken, my previous comment will only be for the
part about inline declarations. I'll go back and look
Marius Strobl schrieb:
On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 01:37:23PM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
Marius Strobl schrieb:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 09:02:36AM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
return with parentheses:
Removed, because it does not improve maintainability in any way. There
is no source for co
Daniel Eischen schrieb:
+1 for leaving style(9) alone.
Have you looked at all the proposed changes? I ask to consider them
individually.
Christoph
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebs
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 4:30 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
> As an old-fart I have found many cases where what I thought was
> a silly style rule, turned out to save my work in some way.
>
> Christoph Mallon wrote:
>
>
>
>>>
>>>struct foo *fp;
>>>struct bar *bp;
>>>
>>>fp = get_foo();
>>>
Julian Elischer schrieb:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
You are mistaken. Re-read the "if": It already contains a "return;" as
then-part. The declaration of "bp" has no relation to the "if".
In fact this is very good: "bp" can only be used after the "if",
because it is declared after it. Further, i
Christoph Mallon wrote:
You are mistaken. Re-read the "if": It already contains a "return;" as
then-part. The declaration of "bp" has no relation to the "if".
In fact this is very good: "bp" can only be used after the "if", because
it is declared after it. Further, it most probably is only as
Zaphod Beeblebrox schrieb:
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 4:30 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
As an old-fart I have found many cases where what I thought was
a silly style rule, turned out to save my work in some way.
Christoph Mallon wrote:
struct foo *fp;
struct bar *bp;
fp = get_foo();
M. Warner Losh wrote:
[...]
(about return ();)
It has been an example used for the past 15 years at least as to why
to do this... I don't know how many people have actually used the
ability to do this in code.
I have done so..
: Also I consider this as gross abuse: Macro names shall be i
> > [snip exciting discussion on style]
> >
> > > There are several C99 features used already, e.g. designated
initializers:
> > > bla bli = { .blub = "foo", .arr[0] = 42 };
> > > Do you suggest that this should not be used, because it is
inconsistent
> > > with all the other existing compound i
On Fri, 01 May 2009 08:57:34 PDT "Matthew Fleming"
wrote:
> [snip exciting discussion on style]
>
> > There are several C99 features used already, e.g. designated initializers:
> > bla bli = { .blub = "foo", .arr[0] = 42 };
> > Do you suggest that this should not be used, because it is inco
[snip exciting discussion on style]
> There are several C99 features used already, e.g. designated
initializers:
> bla bli = { .blub = "foo", .arr[0] = 42 };
> Do you suggest that this should not be used, because it is
inconsistent
> with all the other existing compound initialisations?
Re
In message: <20090501.081229.1359784281@bsdimp.com>
M. Warner Losh writes:
: In message: <49fa8e88.1040...@gmx.de>
: Christoph Mallon writes:
: : M. Warner Losh schrieb:
: : > In message: <20090430233648.ga95...@keira.kiwi-computer.com>
: : > "Rick C. Petty
In message: <49fadef3.5010...@gmx.de>
Christoph Mallon writes:
: Marius Strobl schrieb:
: > On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 09:02:36AM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
: >> return with parentheses:
: >> Removed, because it does not improve maintainability in any way. There
: >> is no source for
In message: <49fa8e88.1040...@gmx.de>
Christoph Mallon writes:
: M. Warner Losh schrieb:
: > In message: <20090430233648.ga95...@keira.kiwi-computer.com>
: > "Rick C. Petty" writes:
: > : On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 09:02:26AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > : >
: > : > This
In message: <49fa8d73.6040...@gmx.de>
Christoph Mallon writes:
: M. Warner Losh schrieb:
: > In message: <20090428114754.gb89...@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
: > Peter Jeremy writes:
: > : >Maybe using all of these changes is a bit too big change at once, but
: > : >I'd like
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 09:02:36AM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
> >
> > return with parentheses:
> > Removed, because it does not improve maintainability in any way. There
> > is no source for confusion here, so the rule even contradicts the rule,
> > which states not to use redundant parent
On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 01:37:23PM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
> Marius Strobl schrieb:
> >On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 09:02:36AM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
> >>return with parentheses:
> >>Removed, because it does not improve maintainability in any way. There
> >>is no source for confusion her
Peter Jeremy schrieb:
On 2009-Apr-26 09:02:36 +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
as some of you may have noticed, several years ago a new millenium
started and a decade ago there was a new C standard.
Your implication that FreeBSD is therefore a decade behind the times
is unfair. Whilst the C99
Christoph Mallon wrote:
Roman Divacky schrieb:
I like the part about using as many variables as possible because
of documentation and performance enhancements. I tend to like
the other changes as well..
This is not about using as many variables as possible. The goal is to
use as many variable
Julian Elischer schrieb:
Christoph Mallon wrote:
No, this is not what I intended. The idea is to limit the scope of
local variables as much as is sensible. Maybe I should have been more
explicit. On the other hand, I also did not mention that it is just
about moving to the start of inner block
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 09:02:36AM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
>
> return with parentheses:
> Removed, because it does not improve maintainability in any way. There
> is no source for confusion here, so the rule even contradicts the rule,
> which states not to use redundant parentheses. Maybe
Marius Strobl schrieb:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 09:02:36AM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
return with parentheses:
Removed, because it does not improve maintainability in any way. There
is no source for confusion here, so the rule even contradicts the rule,
which states not to use redundant par
Julian Elischer schrieb:
As an old-fart I have found many cases where what I thought was
a silly style rule, turned out to save my work in some way.
Christoph Mallon wrote:
struct foo *fp;
struct bar *bp;
fp = get_foo();
if (!fp) return;
bp = fp->bp;
this can't easily
On Fri, 01 May 2009 01:30:26 -0700
Julian Elischer wrote:
> Christoph Mallon wrote:
> >>
> >> since really you'd want to write:
> >>
> >> struct foo *fp = get_foo();
> >> if (!fp) return;
> >> struct bar *bp = fp->bp;
> >>
> >> which isn't legal in 'C'. However, we have enough where
Christoph Mallon wrote:
M. Warner Losh schrieb:
In message: <20090430233648.ga95...@keira.kiwi-computer.com>
"Rick C. Petty" writes:
: On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 09:02:26AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > : > This is the biggest one, and I think it may be too soon.
Also, we
: > nee
As an old-fart I have found many cases where what I thought was
a silly style rule, turned out to save my work in some way.
Christoph Mallon wrote:
struct foo *fp;
struct bar *bp;
fp = get_foo();
if (!fp) return;
bp = fp->bp;
this can't easily be translated to the more
Roman Divacky schrieb:
I like the part about using as many variables as possible because
of documentation and performance enhancements. I tend to like
the other changes as well..
This is not about using as many variables as possible. The goal is to
use as many variables as you have logically d
M. Warner Losh schrieb:
In message: <20090430233648.ga95...@keira.kiwi-computer.com>
"Rick C. Petty" writes:
: On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 09:02:26AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: >
: > This is the biggest one, and I think it may be too soon. Also, we
: > need to be careful on the in
M. Warner Losh schrieb:
In message: <20090428114754.gb89...@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
Peter Jeremy writes:
: >Maybe using all of these changes is a bit too big change at once, but
: >I'd like some of them applied to style(9). So, please consider the
: >proposed changes individually
In message: <20090430233648.ga95...@keira.kiwi-computer.com>
"Rick C. Petty" writes:
: On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 09:02:26AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: >
: > This is the biggest one, and I think it may be too soon. Also, we
: > need to be careful on the initialization side of things
In message: <20090428114754.gb89...@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
Peter Jeremy writes:
: >Maybe using all of these changes is a bit too big change at once, but
: >I'd like some of them applied to style(9). So, please consider the
: >proposed changes individually and not a as a all-or-noth
the big entry allocation has been very helpful in the past.
John
-Original Message-
From: deeptec...@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 11:23 AM
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: C99: Suggestions for style(9)
Christoph Mallon wrote:
>> -When declaring variab
Christoph Mallon wrote:
-When declaring variables in functions declare them sorted by size,
-then in alphabetical order; multiple ones per line are okay.
+When declaring variables in functions declare them sorted in
alphabetical order;
What's wrong with logical grouping, especially when the ne
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2009-Apr-26 09:02:36 +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
as some of you may have noticed, several years ago a new millenium
started and a decade ago there was a new C standard.
Your implication that FreeBSD is therefore a decade behind the times
is unfa
oves
> >+comprehensibility.
> >+Especially avoid re-using variables, whose address has been taken:
> >+.Bd -literal
> >+int i;
> >+foo(&i);
> >+printf("%d\\n", i);
> >+for (i = 0; i != 10; ++i) {
> >+/* BAD: i
On 2009-Apr-26 09:02:36 +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
>as some of you may have noticed, several years ago a new millenium
>started and a decade ago there was a new C standard.
Your implication that FreeBSD is therefore a decade behind the times
is unfair. Whilst the C99 standard was published
optimise stack usage in this way is
misguided and is a source of bugs, when a reused variable is not as dead
as thought. For more reasons, please read the quoted diff.
Maxim, you requested this paragraph: Does this addition suit you?
Hopefully at least some of these suggestions are considered impr
Ian Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Re your original issue, can you get any mileage out of using acpi_ibm,
> devd and this post and/or the other one it references:
The laptop in question does not run FreeBSD. I gave up running FreeBSD
on any sort of desktop or laptop computer years ago.
DES
Gary Kline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've seen that Fn key, but don't know what it is for. What? you press
> it, then follow with the integers [ 1, 2, 3 ... ]? At any rate, maybe
> you can remap the key with ~/.xmodmaprc.
They're used to access keys which won't physically fit on a laptop
ke
On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 13:31 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 01:06:20PM -0700, Nate Eldredge wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Gary Kline wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 01:06:29PM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
> >>> martinko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I hav
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 01:06:20PM -0700, Nate Eldredge wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Gary Kline wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 01:06:29PM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
>>> martinko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I have always thought that Fn key in left most bottom corner of the
ke
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Gary Kline wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 01:06:29PM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
martinko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I have always thought that Fn key in left most bottom corner of the
keyboard is, especially for programmers, a very bad idea. :-(
Seconded. Worse
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 01:06:29PM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
> martinko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I have always thought that Fn key in left most bottom corner of the
> > keyboard is, especially for programmers, a very bad idea. :-(
>
> Seconded. Worse still, on my Lenovo T60, if th
martinko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have always thought that Fn key in left most bottom corner of the
> keyboard is, especially for programmers, a very bad idea. :-(
Seconded. Worse still, on my Lenovo T60, if the Fn key is held down
longer than a fraction of a second, it generates an input
Matt Olander wrote:
On Jul 25, 2008, at 3:23 PM, Jeremy Messenger wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 09:34:32 -0500, Frank Mayhar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My old Dell Inspiron 5160 has developed problems that I can't fix, sigh,
so it's time to replace it. I'm hoping for some
On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 21:45 -0300, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Achim Patzner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Am 30.07.2008 um 18:40 schrieb Dag-Erling Smørgrav:
> >>
> >> I don't understand what Macs have to do with this - we're talking about
> >> iX Systems's m
> And if you go with Lenovo, be aware that their T60/T60p/T61/T61p series
> (and possibly the X-series) are known to sport very high temperatures.
> Some people have reported temperatures of nearly 90C on their GPU (when
> idling), which has a direct effect on the overall temperature of the CPU
> (
On 2008-Jul-27 17:23:46 -0400, Zaphod Beeblebrox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> we'd need a method of remembering what file handles were
>connected to so that they could be "reopened" (in this, I envision some type
>of text string... maybe a URI/URL). As a bonus, this would give us process
>migratio
On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 20:26 -0300, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Tom Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 21:45 -0300, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote:
> >> Please define "comfortable". I've been running FreeBSD 7.0 pretty
> >> comfortabl
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 11:17:54AM +0200, Achim Patzner wrote:
> > Drivers? Who cares. Serial port? Just plug in an USB-to-serial.
>
> You've obviously never used a USB-to-serial adapter. Are you aware of
> the fact that there is no serial device class as part of the USB
> specification? (Quit
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Tom Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 21:45 -0300, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote:
>> Please define "comfortable". I've been running FreeBSD 7.0 pretty
>> comfortably on my HP nx6320 for several months now. I never attempted
>> to use neither
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:17:54 +0200 Achim Patzner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Getting X to run on the *censored* *even more censorship*? No problem,
Like you say, it depends on what you want from X. Leopard's X was
tolerable. Tiger broke full screen mode, and Apple doesn't have the
resources to fi
On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 12:48 +0200, Achim Patzner wrote:
> Wrong on both counts. I'm just using the appropriate tools for the jobs
> that need to be done. And on the desktop FreeBSD just plain sucks in
> comparison to Mac OS.
The problem is that you are expressing your opinion as if it is a Basic
F
Jeremy Chadwick schrieb:
You just did it again -- anti-FreeBSD propaganda and pro-FreeBSD
propaganda in a single paragraph, followed by an oddly-skewed
server-to-desktop comparison, something about computer cosmetics, then a
strange comment about the beastie/Chuck which seems to be negative but
On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 21:45 -0300, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Achim Patzner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Am 30.07.2008 um 18:40 schrieb Dag-Erling Smørgrav:
> >>
> >> I don't understand what Macs have to do with this - we're talking about
> >> iX Systems's
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 01:26:18AM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
Hi,
> FreeBSD has support for webcams? News to me.
Luigi Rizzo was (is?) working on webcam support:
http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/FreeBSD/usb-cameras.html
--
Regards,
Richard.
/* Homo Sapiens non urinat in ventum */
___
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 12:48:02PM +0200, Achim Patzner wrote:
> I don't care.
I can see that; thanks for summing it up.
>> The amount of rhetoric in these two paragraphs is amazing; I literally
>> cannot tell if you're trolling with anti-FreeBSD propaganda, or if
>> you're trolling with pro-Free
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 04:07:31PM -0700, Matt Olander wrote:
> On Jul 30, 2008, at 3:42 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> >Matt Olander wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>>http://www.ixsystems.com/products/bsd-laptop.html
> >>Hi everyone! I actually had our prototype of this laptop up at the
> >>OSCON show in P
Am 31.07.2008 um 12:08 schrieb Jeremy Chadwick:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 11:17:54AM +0200, Achim Patzner wrote:
Drivers? Who cares. Serial port? Just plug in an USB-to-serial.
You've obviously never used a USB-to-serial adapter.
Wrong; I'm using them all the time. Initial kneading of serious
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 11:17:54AM +0200, Achim Patzner wrote:
> Drivers? Who cares. Serial port? Just plug in an USB-to-serial.
You've obviously never used a USB-to-serial adapter. Are you aware of
the fact that there is no serial device class as part of the USB
specification? (Quite a great ir
Am 31.07.2008 um 02:45 schrieb Carlos A. M. dos Santos:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Achim Patzner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I tried to break that habit more than once
but right now the only comfortable way of running FreeBSD on a laptop
is VMware Fusion on a Mac. Reading this entire thread
El día Thursday, July 31, 2008 a las 11:37:16AM +0300, Stefan Lambrev escribió:
> >FreeBSD has support for webcams? News to me.
> >
> multimedia/pwcbsd
> multimedia/linux-gspca-kmod
> multimedia/linux-ov511-kmod
>
> Though I never heard for someone using successfully his webcam with
> skype2
60 has developed problems that I can't fix,
sigh,
so it's time to replace it. I'm hoping for some good suggestions from
this list (cc'd to hackers for the exposure, I know everyone doesn't
read -mobile).
My criteria:
* 3D acceleration.
* MiniPCI wireless (don&
l Inspiron 5160 has developed problems that I can't fix,
>>>> sigh,
>>>> so it's time to replace it. I'm hoping for some good suggestions from
>>>> this list (cc'd to hackers for the exposure, I know everyone doesn't
>>>>
Matt Olander wrote:
On Jul 25, 2008, at 3:23 PM, Jeremy Messenger wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 09:34:32 -0500, Frank Mayhar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My old Dell Inspiron 5160 has developed problems that I can't fix,
sigh,
so it's time to replace it. I'm hoping for
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Achim Patzner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am 30.07.2008 um 18:40 schrieb Dag-Erling Smørgrav:
>>
>> I don't understand what Macs have to do with this - we're talking about
>> iX Systems's made-for-BSD laptop.
>
> The thread started with someone asking for a mobile
1 - 100 of 244 matches
Mail list logo
