On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 08:16:01PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Documentation is not built by default. You have to go into the doc
> > directory and type "make" to get the info manual and "make mach.ps" to get
> > the PostScript version.
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Documentation is not built by default. You have to go into the doc
> directory and type "make" to get the info manual and "make mach.ps" to get
> the PostScript version.
IIRC the coding standards say that you should build docs by default,
and also
Hi,
I feel now reasonable good with the documentation that I committed it to
the CVS, to make maintenance easier. In fact I also added it to the
Debian package, and added the doc and debian dir to the dist target.
The doc/Makefile.in is a hacked version of the Hurd doc/Makefile. It
repeats the
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> MiG doesn't know unsigned short, so I am afraid that I have to use int.
> The conversion from signed shorts to unsigned shorts is implementation
> defined (or can raise a signal even), so I am out of luck here (unless we
> forbid ports higher than 7
> the first system uses two's complement and the other uses one's complement).
Send me mail from your one's complement system and we'll worry about it then.
> It's not even clear that the first conversion from unsigned short to signed
> short is valid on every platform. ISO C says that unsigned
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 04:54:37PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 04:09:37PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > > > The conversion from signed shorts to unsigned shorts is implementation
> > > > defined (or can raise a signal even), so I am out of luck here (unless we
> >
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 04:05:49PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Oy. This problem bites the emacs makefiles that use cpp for non-C too,
> > and emacs uses a really ugly workaround.
> >
> > Perhaps we can win by passing -undef to cpp in the mig script.
> > Please try that.
>
> $ i386-gnu-mi
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 04:09:37PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > > The conversion from signed shorts to unsigned shorts is implementation
> > > defined (or can raise a signal even), so I am out of luck here (unless we
> > > forbid ports higher than 7fff).
> >
> > Say what? Conversions from
You are thinking at least as clearly as I am about this, so certainly don't
apologize for doing it out loud!
On further thought I was unsure about some of the same details of my vague
plan that you brought up.
First, as to the kernel implementation issue. Adding a new IKOT_* flavor
is not rea
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 04:05:49PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Oy. This problem bites the emacs makefiles that use cpp for non-C too,
> and emacs uses a really ugly workaround.
>
> Perhaps we can win by passing -undef to cpp in the mig script.
> Please try that.
$ i386-gnu-mig -nostdinc -DMA
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 04:20:25PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> I think a (partial) bitmask is the simpler interface. I'd think the most
> common case is setting up access for just one device, i.e. a small
> contiguous range of io ports, so supplying a starting port number and a
> word or less
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 04:09:37PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > The conversion from signed shorts to unsigned shorts is implementation
> > defined (or can raise a signal even), so I am out of luck here (unless we
> > forbid ports higher than 7fff).
>
> Say what? Conversions from one bitpatt
> So there are still some details to work out. Like, should ports be reused
> if they specify the same set if permission? I think that would be a good
> idea, but it is costly to make the comparison, and is probably overkill.
Definitely overkill.
___
I think a (partial) bitmask is the simpler interface. I'd think the most
common case is setting up access for just one device, i.e. a small
contiguous range of io ports, so supplying a starting port number and a
word or less of all-ones is very easy for the client side. And bottom
line, that's t
> MiG doesn't know unsigned short, so I am afraid that I have to use int.
MiG is indeed pretty unhelpful, though there is a MACH_MSG_TYPE_INTEGER_16
code.
> The conversion from signed shorts to unsigned shorts is implementation
> defined (or can raise a signal even), so I am out of luck here (u
Oy. This problem bites the emacs makefiles that use cpp for non-C too,
and emacs uses a really ugly workaround.
Perhaps we can win by passing -undef to cpp in the mig script.
Please try that.
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu
On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 03:54:46PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > I have thought about it a little, and although it certainly makes sense, it
> > seems to be more complicated than necessary to me. After all, you then want
> > the kernel to keep track of such ports, and free the associated info
On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 10:54:40PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> type io_reg_t = unsigned short;
> type io_reg_array_t = array[] of io_reg_t;
MiG doesn't know unsigned short, so I am afraid that I have to use int.
The conversion from signed shorts to unsigned shorts is implementation
defined (
Hi,
I have
#if KERNEL_SERVER
simport ;
#endif
in the mach_i386_types.defs. Now look at the generated file:
$ i386-gnu-mig -nostdinc -DMACH -DCMU -DMACH_KERNEL -DKERNEL -DMACH_KMSG=1 \
-DCONTINUATIONS -D__ELF__ -Di386 -DLINUX_DEV -I../i386/i386at -I../i386/i386 \
-I../i386/include -I../i386/
Ïðîäàåòñÿ âèëëà íà Ñåéøåëàõ â 20-òè ìåòðàõ îò Èíäèéñêîãî îêåàíà. 200 êâ.ì.
0,15 Ãà. Ìåáåëü, ñèãíàëèçàöèÿ, ïðèñëóãà.
Ëó÷øèé êëèìàò íà Çåìëå (êðóãëûé ãîä òåìï. âîçäóõà è âîäû 28°)! Ìîñêîâñêîå
âðåìÿ. Ïðÿìîé áåçâèçîâûé ïåðåëåò Àýðîôëîòîì.
Åñëè Âû çàèíòåðåñîâàëèñü ýòèì ïðåäëîæåíèåì è õîòèòå ïîëó÷èòü
..archer, arrow and target are indivisible
components of same process..
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
21 matches
Mail list logo
