Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:14:01 +0200
From: Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi Kalle,
you asked:
> Is it possible to debug the primary exec server with gdb?
> Or is it possible to run another exec server and debug that?
I have successfully attached gdb to the primary
Hi Kalle,
you asked:
> Is it possible to debug the primary exec server with gdb?
> Or is it possible to run another exec server and debug that?
I have successfully attached gdb to the primary exec server (pid 5), but it
is quite unstable, and not recommended.
Here is a way to debug the exec se
Your message dated Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:01:10 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line cleaning up
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reo
Your message dated Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:01:10 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line cleaning up
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reo
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 05:36:49PM -0400, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>
> Fixed, thanks.
Hi Thomas,
while you are at bug fixing, can I draw your attention to Kalles fix to
the exec server? I applied the fix to the last Debian package of the Hurd,
and it works quite well.
http://bugs.debian.or
Your message dated Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:01:10 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line cleaning up
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reo
On Thu, Jul 29, 1999 at 04:57:25PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > I tried the exec gzip'ed and bzip2'ed binaries on the fly feature, but it
> > didn't work quite right.
>
> I will look into this when I get a chance. But this feature is not a high
> priority and we will probably drop it later o
OKUJI Yoshinori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I guess that Miles just copied most code from hostmux when he wrote
> usermux, since usermux still has wrong comments in its code:
>
> izzy@usermux% grep host *.[ch]
> mux.c:/* Free storage allocated consumed by the host mux name NM, but not the no
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it okay to check in the below workaround until you got around to do it
> proper? The current code is certainly bogus and is the cause of a
> reproducible bug. The below patch just restores the situation as it was
> before the breakage.
I just che
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 09:39:24PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
Marcus, I would like to see a /* FIXME: The line causes bug # */
added to the patch. It might be nice in case it gets forgotten.
Just my thoughts.
> hi,
>
> (about io-seek and fgetpos failure on ro-stores)
>
> On Thu, Ap
hi,
(about io-seek and fgetpos failure on ro-stores)
On Thu, Apr 27, 2000 at 04:11:31PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> You are both right, it should definitely be done in a cleaner way. Thomas
> or I will address it when we get the time. It is the case that most uses
> should call diskfs_check
11 matches
Mail list logo
