On Wed, 2022-01-19 at 16:23 +0100, Martijn van Duren wrote:
> The new code uses smi_print_element when debugging is enabled to trace
> calls. Unfortunately the current smi_print_element lacks in quite a few
> departments. This diff rewrites smi_print_element to be more concise
> than what we
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 5:28 AM наб
wrote:
> This is a base-line attempt at separating errors from the child from the
> ones from script itself ‒ 125 is the general-purpose code in POSIX
> utilities that exec() (with 126 being ENOEXEC and 127 ‒ ENOENT)
>
I just checked the draft of the next
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 7:37 AM Scott Cheloha
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 07:28:40AM -0700, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 20:02:18 -0800, Philip Guenther wrote:
> >
> > > > I think futimens(2) and close(2) failures are exotic enough to
> warrant
> > > > printing the system
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 11:05:51AM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 01:29:42AM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > There were some problems with ix(4) and ixl(4) hardware checksumming
> > for the output path on strict alignment architectures.
> >
> > I have merged
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 04:33:28PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 09, 2022 at 02:54:43PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > currently malloc does cache a number of free'ed regions up to 128k in
> > size. This cache is indexed by size (in # of pages), so it is very
> > quick to check.
>
On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 09:37:33 -0600, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> Alright, you have both convinced me.
>
> We'll go with this patch?
Sure. OK millert@
- todd
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 07:28:40AM -0700, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 20:02:18 -0800, Philip Guenther wrote:
>
> > > I think futimens(2) and close(2) failures are exotic enough to warrant
> > > printing the system call name.
> >
> > I don't understand this. Can you give an
On Sun, Jan 09, 2022 at 02:54:43PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> currently malloc does cache a number of free'ed regions up to 128k in
> size. This cache is indexed by size (in # of pages), so it is very
> quick to check.
>
> Some programs allocate and deallocate larger allocations in a frantic
>
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 03:54:14PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 09:31:26AM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 09:38:54AM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 07:46:32AM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 09:31:26AM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 09:38:54AM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 07:46:32AM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 04:42:04PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > > > So the RFC is not very clear
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 08:23:18PM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
> in4_cksum(), used to compute packet checksums for the legacy internet
> protocol, has been hand-optimized for speed on most elderly platforms,
> with the most recent pieces of silicon using a portable C
> implementation.
>
> Most of
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 20:02:18 -0800, Philip Guenther wrote:
> > I think futimens(2) and close(2) failures are exotic enough to warrant
> > printing the system call name.
> >
>
> I don't understand this. Can you give an example of an error message that
> touch currently might emit where knowing
This is a base-line attempt at separating errors from the child from the
ones from script itself ‒ 125 is the general-purpose code in POSIX
utilities that exec() (with 126 being ENOEXEC and 127 ‒ ENOENT)
---
Please keep me in CC, as I'm not subscribed.
usr.bin/script/script.1 | 6 ++
Use execl in both paths and the same warn() call
---
Please keep me in CC, as I'm not subscribed.
usr.bin/script/script.c | 17 ++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/usr.bin/script/script.c b/usr.bin/script/script.c
index 763975d6a..fd2829033 100644
---
script.1 says
> script will exit with the status of 0 unless any of its child
> processes fail, in which case, script will return 1.
This is a patent lie: it only exits with 1 if the host or writer
processes fail, not the actual child
Instead, wait for the child in the writer process and bubble
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 01:07:10PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> I think I introduced a bit of an error when skipping cleanup of RRDP
> directories when RRDP is off. When RRDP is off the cache is updated via
> rsync but when RRDP is turned back on later on the cache does not match
> with the RRDP
I think I introduced a bit of an error when skipping cleanup of RRDP
directories when RRDP is off. When RRDP is off the cache is updated via
rsync but when RRDP is turned back on later on the cache does not match
with the RRDP state file and so deltas will often fail to apply.
It is better to
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 09:38:54AM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 07:46:32AM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 04:42:04PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > > So the RFC is not very clear but in general the idea is that if multiple
> > > MFTs are available
18 matches
Mail list logo
