On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 03:58:41AM +0400, Alexander Polakov wrote:
So I have been trying to write a new audio driver (for Xonar DS if
anyone interested) and therefore reading audio(9).
I was confused for a while by the use of will here. I think it's not
clear enough that these functions
ld.so in -current isn't building right now, due to an undefined reference to
_dl_realloc caused by the recent addition of _dl_reallocarray. The following
diff implements _dl_realloc, largely copied from the implementation in
lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c.
tested on amd64
Index: malloc.c
On 06/24/14 09:30, William Orr wrote:
ld.so in -current isn't building right now, due to an undefined reference to
_dl_realloc caused by the recent addition of _dl_reallocarray. The following
diff implements _dl_realloc, largely copied from the implementation in
lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c.
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 09:13:47AM +0200, Alexandre Ratchov wrote:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 03:58:41AM +0400, Alexander Polakov wrote:
So I have been trying to write a new audio driver (for Xonar DS if
anyone interested) and therefore reading audio(9).
I was confused for a while by the
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 01:30:55AM -0700, William Orr wrote:
ld.so in -current isn't building right now, due to an undefined reference to
_dl_realloc caused by the recent addition of _dl_reallocarray. The following
diff implements _dl_realloc, largely copied from the implementation in
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 15:07 +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
I have carefully tested that and do not expect any unrelated
fallout. And for the reasons stated above I don't believe
anyone is using this since it's largely error prone.
and a regress chunk that avoids using such combination.
On 2014/06/24 15:07, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
I propose to avoid the confusion by flagging such situations as
errors, e.g.:
% echo 'pass out nat-to { ::1 1.1.1.1 }' | ./obj/pfctl -o none -vnf -
stdin:1: translation spec contains addresses with different address families
stdin:1: skipping
It's obvious that whole page needs a content update by a VAX expert.
that is correct. All the rest of the discussion is moot.
Only miod and martynas can swing this the right way.
I disagree with Ted about making this a seperate page, since that
would remove a vital component of floating point
Hi,
Theo de Raadt wrote on Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 09:09:49AM -0600:
Ingo Schwarze wrote:
It's obvious that whole page needs a content update by a VAX expert.
that is correct. All the rest of the discussion is moot.
Only miod and martynas can swing this the right way.
I disagree with Ted
Hi,
As I see not activity or feedback for this one line patch, I think it
need more explain ?
Currently, when you pass an URL with user/pass embed, the code parse it
badly.
For example:
https://mym...@example.com:my-passw...@another-domain.example.com/blabla
Just before the code search if the
Whoops! Sorry for the confusion; disregard.
On Jun 24, 2014, at 3:31 AM, Otto Moerbeek o...@drijf.net wrote:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 01:30:55AM -0700, William Orr wrote:
ld.so in -current isn't building right now, due to an undefined reference to
_dl_realloc caused by the recent addition of
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Sébastien Marie
semarie-open...@latrappe.fr wrote:
As I see not activity or feedback for this one line patch, I think it
need more explain ?
Sorry, the patch is incorrect; per RFC 3986, the parser is correct to split
the authority on the first '@'. The
POSIX specifies these error cases for memory faults:
SIGSEGV/SEGV_MAPERR: Accessing an unmapped page.
SIGSEGV/SEGV_ACCERR: Reading from a non-readable or writing to a
non-writable page.
SIGBUS/BUS_ADRERR: Accessing a mapped page that exceeds the end of
the underlying mapped file.
I
Hi,
time to merge another fix from NetBSD (and FreeBSD who applied it too):
If sector size is not 512, the boot signature is placed at a wrong
position. It always has to be at offset 510/511, not sector size - 2.
# dd if=/dev/zero of=fat.iso bs=1M count=1
# vnconfig vnd0c fat.iso
# newfs_msdos
* Jason McIntyre j...@kerhand.co.uk [140625 00:41]:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 09:13:47AM +0200, Alexandre Ratchov wrote:
I see what you mean. As the manual describes the interface between
two layers we may need to be more precise about who calls who.
Wouldn't the following be less ambigous?
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 11:04:10AM -0700, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
SIGBUS/BUS_ADRERR: Accessing a mapped page that exceeds the end of
the underlying mapped file.
Generating SIGBUS for this case has proven controversial due to
concern that this is Linux invented behavior and not compatible
Matthew -- fine, you collected information. Thank you.
It is quite clear that POSIX set in stone an accident, a significant
error in my opinion. Anyone with enough expertise can recognize this
is an accident in the SVR4 codebase, which ended up being ratified
(in quotes, because the more
17 matches
Mail list logo
