On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Justus Winter
<4win...@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> wrote:
> Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-11-23 21:11:05)
>> Hello,
>>
>> David Michael, le Wed 19 Nov 2014 19:39:43 -0500, a écrit :
>> > The only issue was that /etc/hurd/runsystem.hurd didn't get installed.
>> > I ta
Justus Winter, le Sun 23 Nov 2014 23:06:58 +0100, a écrit :
> Previously, `pager_demuxer' allocated a chunk of memory for the
> response message. But if memory gets scarce, the kernel will issue a
> large number of paging requests to free up memory. In such a
> situation, allocating memory is dan
Justus Winter, le Sun 23 Nov 2014 23:06:59 +0100, a écrit :
> * libdiskfs/dir-init.c (diskfs_init_dir): Fix fabrication of protid.
Ack.
> ---
> libdiskfs/dir-init.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/libdiskfs/dir-init.c b/libdiskfs/dir-init.c
> index 4ef
Previously, `pager_demuxer' allocated a chunk of memory for the
response message. But if memory gets scarce, the kernel will issue a
large number of paging requests to free up memory. In such a
situation, allocating memory is dangerous.
Fix this by not allocating space for the response message,
* libdiskfs/dir-init.c (diskfs_init_dir): Fix fabrication of protid.
---
libdiskfs/dir-init.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/libdiskfs/dir-init.c b/libdiskfs/dir-init.c
index 4efded0..8301ca1 100644
--- a/libdiskfs/dir-init.c
+++ b/libdiskfs/dir-init.c
@@ -33
Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-11-23 21:11:05)
> Hello,
>
> David Michael, le Wed 19 Nov 2014 19:39:43 -0500, a écrit :
> > The only issue was that /etc/hurd/runsystem.hurd didn't get installed.
> > I tacked the following onto patch #4 in the series to try it.
>
> Justus, do we need it?
I guess i
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Samuel Thibault
wrote:
> Could you try the patch I have just pushed? I believe it should be
> doing the right thing.
I confirm it fixes pathnames. Thanks
--
G..e
Hello,
David Michael, le Wed 19 Nov 2014 19:39:43 -0500, a écrit :
> The only issue was that /etc/hurd/runsystem.hurd didn't get installed.
> I tacked the following onto patch #4 in the series to try it.
Justus, do we need it?
Samuel
Samuel Thibault, le Sun 23 Nov 2014 19:48:15 +0100, a écrit :
> It seems that on Linux the libc also gets dlopened like that, but I
> guess initialization happens to get done enough for it to be working.
Ok, I have found where to fix it, and will commit.
Samuel
Hello,
Svante Signell, le Thu 20 Nov 2014 12:42:30 +0100, a écrit :
> (11:03:58) mjt: hello. it looks like hurd-i386 is the only arch where my
> one-line build-test program fails -- see
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=busybox
I've had a closer look. My initial guess was wrong.
Hello,
While Svante is working on the record locking, I have worked on at
least fixing whole file locking: there was one bug in our current
implementation: flock(LOCK_SH); flock(LOCK_EX);, as per POSIX, does not
guarantee an atomic upgrade from LOCK_SH to LOCK_EX. But
fcntl(SETLK,F_RDLCK); fcntl(S
Joel Brobecker, le Sun 23 Nov 2014 13:56:29 +0400, a écrit :
> The above does look unusual to me, but if it works and seems to be
> the only correct way, let's go with that.
It is a system interface actually, so we don't really have the choice :)
Samuel
2014-10-02 Samuel Thibault
* gdb/gnu-nat.c (inf_validate_procinfo): Multiply the number of
elements pi_len by the size of the elements before calling
vm_deallocate.
(inf_validate_task_sc): Likewise, and properly deallocate the
noise array.
diff --git a/g
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 09:21:45AM +0100, Daniel wrote:
> I am searching for a minimal edition of the Hurd Kernel
> ( this is the right mailing list, isn't it? ) to transfere it to an
> exotic platform, which is pretty small, too.
> I am searching for something like an early development release
>
> > > - vm_deallocate (mach_task_self (), (vm_address_t) pi, pi_len);
> > > + vm_deallocate (mach_task_self (), (vm_address_t) pi, pi_len *
> > > sizeof (*(procinfo_t) 0));
> >
> > Suggest using "sizeof (struct procinfo)", which I think is better
> > than dereferencing a NULL pointer. T
Joel Brobecker, le Sun 23 Nov 2014 11:44:52 +0400, a écrit :
> > - vm_deallocate (mach_task_self (), (vm_address_t) pi, pi_len);
> > + vm_deallocate (mach_task_self (), (vm_address_t) pi, pi_len * sizeof
> > (*(procinfo_t) 0));
>
> Suggest using "sizeof (struct procinfo)", which I think
16 matches
Mail list logo