Sam Ravnborg wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 12:54:33AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
From: Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:45:41 +0100
So we could do:
config foo
tristate "do you want foo?"
depends on USB && BAR
module
Sam Ravnborg wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 12:54:33AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
From: Sam Ravnborg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:45:41 +0100
So we could do:
config foo
tristate do you want foo?
depends on USB BAR
module
obj-$(CONFIG_FOO) +=
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, 25 of January 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:10:11 +0100, "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" said:
- you will introduce a new step on git management:
Every changeset is compile-tested before going out to the world.
I think this c
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The release is out there (both git trees and as tarballs/patches), and for
the next week many kernel developers will be at (or flying into/out of)
LCA in Melbourne, so let's hope it's a good one.
Since I already had two kernel
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The release is out there (both git trees and as tarballs/patches), and for
the next week many kernel developers will be at (or flying into/out of)
LCA in Melbourne, so let's hope it's a good one.
Since I already had two kernel
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, 25 of January 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:10:11 +0100, Giacomo A. Catenazzi said:
- you will introduce a new step on git management:
Every changeset is compile-tested before going out to the world.
I think this can be done
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
const No writes through this lvalue. In the absence of this qualifier, writes
may occur
through this lvalue.
volatile No cacheing through this lvalue: each operation in the abstract
semantics must
be performed (that is, no cacheing
Jakob Oestergaard wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 01:25:39PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
...
Why do you make that mistake, when it is PROVABLY NOT TRUE!
Try this trivial program:
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
int i;
const int *c;
Jakob Oestergaard wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 01:25:39PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
...
Why do you make that mistake, when it is PROVABLY NOT TRUE!
Try this trivial program:
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
int i;
const int *c;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
const No writes through this lvalue. In the absence of this qualifier, writes
may occur
through this lvalue.
volatile No cacheing through this lvalue: each operation in the abstract
semantics must
be performed (that is, no cacheing
Diego Calleja wrote:
El Tue, 4 Dec 2007 22:47:45 +0100, "J.A. Magallón" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
That is what I like of C++, with good placement of high level features
like const's and & (references) one can gain fine control over what
gets copied or not.
But...if there's some way Linux
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 of December 2007, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Ingo Molnar wrote:
hi,
* Giacomo Catenazzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2.6.24-rc1-gc9927c2b BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at
virtual address 3d15b925
In last git, I see the followin
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 of December 2007, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Ingo Molnar wrote:
hi,
* Giacomo Catenazzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2.6.24-rc1-gc9927c2b BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at
virtual address 3d15b925
In last git, I see the following BUGs
Diego Calleja wrote:
El Tue, 4 Dec 2007 22:47:45 +0100, J.A. Magallón [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
That is what I like of C++, with good placement of high level features
like const's and (references) one can gain fine control over what
gets copied or not.
But...if there's some way Linux can
Jon Masters wrote:
On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 23:45 +0100, Bodo Eggert wrote:
Jon Masters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 11:11 -0800, Ray Lee wrote:
On Nov 29, 2007 10:56 AM, Jon Masters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To lift Alan's example, a naive first implementation
would be to
Ingo Molnar wrote:
hi,
* Giacomo Catenazzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2.6.24-rc1-gc9927c2b BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at
virtual address 3d15b925
In last git, I see the following BUGs in various programs. It seems
reproducible, but sometime I've hard lookup on po
Ingo Molnar wrote:
hi,
* Giacomo Catenazzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2.6.24-rc1-gc9927c2b BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at
virtual address 3d15b925
In last git, I see the following BUGs in various programs. It seems
reproducible, but sometime I've hard lookup on poweroff
Jon Masters wrote:
On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 23:45 +0100, Bodo Eggert wrote:
Jon Masters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 11:11 -0800, Ray Lee wrote:
On Nov 29, 2007 10:56 AM, Jon Masters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To lift Alan's example, a naive first implementation
would be to
Mark Lord wrote:
Ingo Molnar wrote:
..
This is all QA-101 that _cannot be argued against on a rational
basis_, it's just that these sorts of things have been largely ignored
for years, in favor of the all-too-easy "open source means many
eyeballs and that is our QA" answer, which is a _good_
Mark Lord wrote:
Ingo Molnar wrote:
..
This is all QA-101 that _cannot be argued against on a rational
basis_, it's just that these sorts of things have been largely ignored
for years, in favor of the all-too-easy open source means many
eyeballs and that is our QA answer, which is a _good_
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Oct 23 2007 07:44, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
I do have a pseudo LSM called "multiadm" at
http://freshmeat.net/p/multiadm/ , quoting:
Policy is dead simple since it is based on UIDs. The UID ranges can be
set on module load time or during runtime (sysfs params)
Crispin Cowan wrote:
Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
What do technical and regulatory differences have "driver/LSM module" that
is build-in and one that is modular?
It seems to me silly to find difference. A kernel with a new kernel module
is a new kernel.
*I* understand that, from
Crispin Cowan wrote:
Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
What do technical and regulatory differences have driver/LSM module that
is build-in and one that is modular?
It seems to me silly to find difference. A kernel with a new kernel module
is a new kernel.
*I* understand that, from a security
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Oct 23 2007 07:44, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
I do have a pseudo LSM called multiadm at
http://freshmeat.net/p/multiadm/ , quoting:
Policy is dead simple since it is based on UIDs. The UID ranges can be
set on module load time or during runtime (sysfs params). This LSM
[added the owner of the old list]
Sam Ravnborg wrote:
The vger postmasters has created linux-kbuild on my request.
The old list at sourceforge had a few issues:
- it was subscriber-only
- it were relying on moderation
For me it is ok.
It was subscriber-only because this was a very low
[added the owner of the old list]
Sam Ravnborg wrote:
The vger postmasters has created linux-kbuild on my request.
The old list at sourceforge had a few issues:
- it was subscriber-only
- it were relying on moderation
For me it is ok.
It was subscriber-only because this was a very low
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Aug 14 2007 16:21, Jason Uhlenkott wrote:
On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 15:55:48 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
NULL is not 0 though.
It is. Its representation isn't guaranteed to be all-bits-zero,
C guarantees that.
Hmm. It depends on your interpretation of
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Aug 14 2007 16:21, Jason Uhlenkott wrote:
On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 15:55:48 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
NULL is not 0 though.
It is. Its representation isn't guaranteed to be all-bits-zero,
C guarantees that.
Hmm. It depends on your interpretation of
Bhutani Meeta-W19091 wrote:
Motorola would like to understand if kernel.org has a contributor
agreement (or a copyright assignment agreement) that is posted somewhere
? We are investigating what would be needed from a legal standpoint to
possibly contribute in the future.
For "kernel.org"
Bhutani Meeta-W19091 wrote:
Motorola would like to understand if kernel.org has a contributor
agreement (or a copyright assignment agreement) that is posted somewhere
? We are investigating what would be needed from a legal standpoint to
possibly contribute in the future.
For kernel.org you
Jonathan Corbet wrote:
+The volatile storage class was originally meant for memory-mapped I/O
+registers. Within the kernel, register accesses, too, should be protected
I don't think it deserves to be added in documentation, but just for
reference: in userspace "volatile" is needed in signals
Jonathan Corbet wrote:
+The volatile storage class was originally meant for memory-mapped I/O
+registers. Within the kernel, register accesses, too, should be protected
I don't think it deserves to be added in documentation, but just for
reference: in userspace volatile is needed in signals
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>> In other words, in the GPL, "Program" does NOT mean "binary". Never has.
>> Agreed. So what? How does this relate with the point above?
>>
>> The binary is a Program, as much as the sources are a Program. Both
>> forms
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>> In other words, in the GPL, "Program" does NOT mean "binary". Never has.
>> Agreed. So what? How does this relate with the point above?
>>
>> The binary is a Program, as much as the sources are a Program. Both
>> forms
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
In other words, in the GPL, Program does NOT mean binary. Never has.
Agreed. So what? How does this relate with the point above?
The binary is a Program, as much as the sources are a Program. Both
forms are subject to
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
In other words, in the GPL, Program does NOT mean binary. Never has.
Agreed. So what? How does this relate with the point above?
The binary is a Program, as much as the sources are a Program. Both
forms are subject to
Al Boldi wrote:
Trond Myklebust wrote:
On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 11:25 +0200, Dumitru Ciobarcianu wrote:
On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 01:50 +0200, Matti Aarnio wrote:
I do already see spammers smart enough to retry addresses from
the zombie machine, but that share is now below 10% of all emails.
My
Al Boldi wrote:
Trond Myklebust wrote:
On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 11:25 +0200, Dumitru Ciobarcianu wrote:
On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 01:50 +0200, Matti Aarnio wrote:
I do already see spammers smart enough to retry addresses from
the zombie machine, but that share is now below 10% of all emails.
My
An oops in last kernel. I happens on early shutdown.
I had two other oops in last week (with latest bk tree), but
I was hard crash (still in X) and without any logs.
Because of these thee crash (over some more restart), I think
the bug is probably reproducible.
BTW, there is an extra space before
An oops in last kernel. I happens on early shutdown.
I had two other oops in last week (with latest bk tree), but
I was hard crash (still in X) and without any logs.
Because of these thee crash (over some more restart), I think
the bug is probably reproducible.
BTW, there is an extra space before
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
but what what's the
penalty of preventing microcode from loading? a performance
hit?
not even that; in theory a few cpu bugs may have been fixed. Nobody
really knows since there's no changelog for the microcode..
You can see the processor bugs in intel website, i.e.:
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
but what what's the
penalty of preventing microcode from loading? a performance
hit?
not even that; in theory a few cpu bugs may have been fixed. Nobody
really knows since there's no changelog for the microcode..
You can see the processor bugs in intel website, i.e.:
"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
>
> Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > [esr]
> > > Besides, right now the configurator has a simple invariant. It will
> > > only accept consistent configurations
> >
> > So you are saying that the old 'vi .config; make oldconfig' trick is
> > officially
Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Peter Samuelson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[esr]
Besides, right now the configurator has a simple invariant. It will
only accept consistent configurations
So you are saying that the old 'vi .config; make oldconfig' trick is
officially unsupported? That's too bad,
"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
>
> This is a proposal for an attribution metadata system in the Linux kernel
> sources. The goal of the system is to make it easy for people reading
> any given piece of code to identify the responsible maintainer. The motivation
> for this proposal is that the
"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
This is a proposal for an attribution metadata system in the Linux kernel
sources. The goal of the system is to make it easy for people reading
any given piece of code to identify the responsible maintainer. The motivation
for this proposal is that the present
Fremont, California 94539
S: USA
+N: Giacomo Catenazzi
+E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+D: Random kernel hack and fixes
+D: Author of scripts/cpu_detect.sh
+S: Switzerland
+
N: Gordon Chaffee
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
W: http://bmrc.berkeley.edu/people/chaffee/
diff -uNr old.linux/Makefile linux/Makefile
--
Fremont, California 94539
S: USA
+N: Giacomo Catenazzi
+E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+D: Random kernel hack and fixes
+D: Author of scripts/cpu_detect.sh
+S: Switzerland
+
N: Gordon Chaffee
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
W: http://bmrc.berkeley.edu/people/chaffee/
diff -uNr old.linux/Makefile linux/Makefile
--
@@ -458,6 +458,12 @@
S: Fremont, California 94539
S: USA
+N: Giacomo Catenazzi
+E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+D: Random kernel hack and fixes
+D: Author of scripts/cpu_detect.sh
+S: Switzerland
+
N: Gordon Chaffee
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
W: http://bmrc.berkeley.edu/people/chaffee/
diff -urN old.linux
--- old.linux/scripts/cpu_detect.sh Thu Jan 1 01:00:00 1970
+++ linux/scripts/cpu_detect.sh Fri Dec 29 14:10:42 2000
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+#! /bin/bash
+
+# Copyright (C) 2000 Giacomo Catenazzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+# This is free software, see GNU General Public License 2 for det
x/scripts/cpu_detect.sh Thu Jan 1 01:00:00 1970
+++ linux/scripts/cpu_detect.sh Fri Dec 29 14:10:42 2000
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+#! /bin/bash
+
+# Copyright (C) 2000 Giacomo Catenazzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+# This is free software, see GNU General Public License 2 for details.
+
+# This script try to auto
@@ -458,6 +458,12 @@
S: Fremont, California 94539
S: USA
+N: Giacomo Catenazzi
+E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+D: Random kernel hack and fixes
+D: Author of scripts/cpu_detect.sh
+S: Switzerland
+
N: Gordon Chaffee
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
W: http://bmrc.berkeley.edu/people/chaffee/
diff -urN old.linux
"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
>
> I backed away from this because Giacomo Catenazzi told me he was
> working on a separate autoconfigurator that would generate config
> files in CML1 format. That's a cleaner design -- one would run his
> autoconfigurator and then im
"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
>
> I wrote:
> >Giacomo, what's the state of your project?
>
> Sigh, I got an address-invalid bounce from Giacomo. Looks like he
> may have fallen off the net.
I still receive mails!
Maybe try [EMAIL PROTECTED] [better administrators, better software :-)]
"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
I wrote:
Giacomo, what's the state of your project?
Sigh, I got an address-invalid bounce from Giacomo. Looks like he
may have fallen off the net.
I still receive mails!
Maybe try [EMAIL PROTECTED] [better administrators, better software :-)]
giacomo
-
"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
I backed away from this because Giacomo Catenazzi told me he was
working on a separate autoconfigurator that would generate config
files in CML1 format. That's a cleaner design -- one would run his
autoconfigurator and then import the resulting config int
56 matches
Mail list logo
