603 lines
25 KiB
Plaintext
603 lines
25 KiB
Plaintext
Subject: Linux-Development Digest #550
|
|
From: Digestifier <Linux-Development-Request@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>
|
|
To: Linux-Development@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
|
|
Reply-To: Linux-Development@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
|
|
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 94 23:13:04 EST
|
|
|
|
Linux-Development Digest #550, Volume #1 Sun, 13 Mar 94 23:13:04 EST
|
|
|
|
Contents:
|
|
Re: Lint for Linux? (Grant Edwards)
|
|
Re: Annoying interactive bug in nslookup? (Frank Lofaro)
|
|
Re: Amiga FileSystem, Anyone? (David Holland)
|
|
Re: Amiga File System, once again (Hamish Macdonald)
|
|
Re: A truely non-debugging Kernel? (Frank Lofaro)
|
|
Annoying interactive bug in nslookup? (G. "Wolfe" Woodbury)
|
|
Re: I'm developing UMSDOS Linux Pkg. (Jim Morris)
|
|
Re: UDP report card (Frank Lofaro)
|
|
Re: A truely non-debugging Kernel? (David C Ferovick)
|
|
Re: Possibly-fatal ISOFS bug +PATCH (Re: A truly non-debugging Kernel?) (Eric Youngdale)
|
|
Re: Startup code (DOS boot program) (Jon Peatfield)
|
|
Re: Amiga File System, once again (Alan Braggins)
|
|
Help increasing allowed # of processes (James D. Levine)
|
|
Re: UDP report card (Charles Hedrick)
|
|
Re: ircII compilation problems - Fix! (Jon Green)
|
|
Re: Take a look at this netstat, please... (Jon Green)
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: grante@aquarius.rosemount.com (Grant Edwards)
|
|
Subject: Re: Lint for Linux?
|
|
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 1994 19:04:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Aubrey Jaffer (jaffer@zurich.ai.mit.edu) wrote:
|
|
: stevev@miser.uoregon.edu (Steve VanDevender) writes:
|
|
: elmnjb@unidhp.uni-c.dk (Niels J. Bagger) writes:
|
|
|
|
: As the title says: Does lint(1) exist for Linux?
|
|
|
|
: gcc -Wall is pretty close to lint for telling you about dumb C
|
|
: coding practices.
|
|
|
|
: Not close enough! If you code with K&R style function prototypes (as
|
|
: opposed to ANSI) then gcc -Wall tells you nothing about argument
|
|
: mismatch and number of arguments mismatch between modules.
|
|
|
|
: I have to code for a variety of machines not all of which support ANSI
|
|
: prototypes. Lint is essential for finding argument mismatch. I wish
|
|
: I could find a lint for linux so I wouldn't have to ship my code
|
|
: elsewhere just to use lint.
|
|
|
|
There's a company called Gimpel Software that sells a lint product in
|
|
shrouded source form for unix systems. They also sell MS-DOS and OS/2
|
|
binary versions. I've only seen the PC version, but it looked like a
|
|
decent product -- though you could spend the rest of your life getting
|
|
it configured juuuust right so that there weren't any spurious
|
|
messages.
|
|
|
|
It won a 1991 Computer Language / Jolt Cola product excellence award
|
|
according to the advert -- for what that's worth. :)
|
|
|
|
Gimpel Software
|
|
3207 Hogarth Lane
|
|
Collegeville, PA 19426
|
|
|
|
215 584 4261
|
|
215 584 4266 (fax)
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Grant Edwards |Yow! Bo Derek ruined my
|
|
Rosemount Inc. |life!
|
|
|
|
|
grante@rosemount.com |
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: ftlofaro@unlv.edu (Frank Lofaro)
|
|
Subject: Re: Annoying interactive bug in nslookup?
|
|
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 94 06:32:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <ggw-110394104323@suemac.cds.duke.edu> ggw@cds.duke.edu writes:
|
|
>I've been using Linux (Slackware 1.1.2 0.99pl15 plus lots of sources)
|
|
>on a Pentium for several weeks now. The system is quite stable and
|
|
>is in regular use as our internet firewall/gateway machine.
|
|
>(Seagate N12400 with Adaptec 1542c SCSI disk, Diamond Stealth video,
|
|
>SMC Elite Combo ethernet card, zoom 14.4 modem, STB 4com, tb+)
|
|
>
|
|
>The only annoying thing that I can't find an easy answer/solution for
|
|
>is that the nslookup program doesn't like the "enter" key at the end of
|
|
>an inquiry (it takes two returns for it to recognize a query.)
|
|
>
|
|
>This has to be a known problem, but I can't find a mention in the NET HowTo
|
|
>(or am I blind?) and looking at the code seems to imply that it may be a
|
|
>problem in "flex"?
|
|
>
|
|
>Any comments would be appreciated.
|
|
>
|
|
>--
|
|
>Gregory G. "Wolfe" Woodbury @, but not speaking for Duke Univ.
|
|
>System Admin Demographic Studies Box 90408 Durham NC 27708
|
|
>ggw@cds.duke.edu ggw@acpub.duke.edu ggw@wolves.durham.nc.us
|
|
>"Myth is metaphor, and ritual is the enactment of myth."
|
|
|
|
If you get weird problems with interactive programs compiled with flex,
|
|
have flex get called with the -I (interactive) option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Subject: Re: Amiga FileSystem, Anyone?
|
|
From: dholland@husc7.harvard.edu (David Holland)
|
|
Date: 13 Mar 94 04:10:44
|
|
|
|
|
|
kai@khms.westfalen.de's message of 12 Mar 1994 21:55:00 +0100 said:
|
|
|
|
> 1. Obscure & messy noes not mean it's not real workable.
|
|
|
|
True. But it's not real workable as an easy general solution -
|
|
compared to installing filesystems on an Amiga, for example. Or even
|
|
in Linux, where you do have to compile things.
|
|
|
|
> 2. What do you mean, "not necessarily supported"?!
|
|
|
|
I mean that Microsoft won't support it. Microsoft has been known to
|
|
intentionally change these things to try to break somebody else's
|
|
program. Maybe the existence of Novell DOS will stop them now, maybe
|
|
not; who knows?
|
|
|
|
> 3. *Of course* you are limited to 8+3 - that's DOS's *concept* of a
|
|
> filesystem.
|
|
|
|
Well, that's broken, and makes it impossible for DOS to really use
|
|
most other filesystems. :-)
|
|
|
|
> 4. Various programs are either not suitable for working with anything but
|
|
> a FAT file system, because they know too much about it, or else have
|
|
> stupid bugs. It's the same with, say, Unix & NFS.
|
|
|
|
True...
|
|
|
|
> NETX is simply stone-age code.
|
|
|
|
That's obviously the case. It seems the state of the art has managed
|
|
to improve a bit since I last really paid attention to the DOS world
|
|
(which wasn't all that long ago, before everybody jumps down my throat.)
|
|
|
|
> > Obviously, you disagree. But I don't see why that should mean I don't
|
|
> > know what I'm talking about.
|
|
>
|
|
> It might have something to do with having or not having good arguments ...
|
|
> :-)
|
|
|
|
Evidently. Isn't it amazing how much easier it when people explain
|
|
instead of just saying "you're an idiot"?
|
|
|
|
So when is the ext2fs for DOS going to be ready? :-]
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
- David A. Holland | "The right to be heard does not automatically
|
|
dholland@husc.harvard.edu | include the right to be taken seriously."
|
|
- - - - - - - - - -
|
|
This message shall NOT be quoted or copied out of the electronic medium
|
|
in which it originated without explicit permission from the author.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: Hamish.Macdonald@bnr.ca (Hamish Macdonald)
|
|
Subject: Re: Amiga File System, once again
|
|
Date: 13 Mar 1994 19:47:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
>>>>> On 11 Mar 1994 09:59:26 EST,
|
|
>>>>> In message <ARMB.94Mar11145929@hamsta.setanta.demon.co.uk>,
|
|
>>>>> armb@setanta.demon.co.uk (Alan Braggins) wrote:
|
|
|
|
Alan> At least one of the questioners had Amiga floppies, but no
|
|
Alan> longer had access to an Amiga. I use a Linux PC at work, and
|
|
Alan> would prefer to transfer stuff home to an Amiga without having
|
|
Alan> to go through 8+3 character case-insensitive filenames. So. if
|
|
Alan> such a filesystem could be written, it would have (limited)
|
|
Alan> uses.
|
|
|
|
You could presumably put an AmigaDOS filesystem on a physically
|
|
PC-formatted (720K) floppy, and then read the floppy on the Amiga.
|
|
|
|
Alan> (Someone did ask if minix or ext2 filesystems existed for
|
|
Alan> AmigaDos (working in a similar way to CrossDos/MessyDos), but I
|
|
Alan> didn't see an answer.
|
|
|
|
I thought that I'd mentioned that at one time someone was working on a
|
|
Minix filesystem for AmigaDOS. I'll have to ask the author if he's
|
|
continued work on it (and/or would be willing to give out his source).
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: ftlofaro@unlv.edu (Frank Lofaro)
|
|
Subject: Re: A truely non-debugging Kernel?
|
|
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 94 20:50:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <1994Mar12.195624.9113@rpp386> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
|
|
>In article <DOUG.94Mar11165709@midget.towson.edu> doug@midget.towson.edu (Doug McNaught) writes:
|
|
>>In article <2loo9h$fo8@aurora.engr.latech.edu> ramos@engr.latech.edu (Alex Ramos) writes:
|
|
>>
|
|
>>>Geez! The kernel has _so much_ debugging code (sanity checks, etc) that
|
|
>>>I wonder how much smaller it could be. It seems most kernel developers
|
|
>>>have never heard of #ifdef... Just a thought :-)
|
|
>>
|
|
>> Well, I'd rather give up some memory and have something that panics
|
|
>>and shuts itself down rather than blindly hosing my filesystems and/or
|
|
>>hardware... I *like* sanity checks. A lot.
|
|
>
|
|
>That's all or nothing thinking -- ship the kernel with #ifdef DEBUG and
|
|
>after a few weeks when you are happy, recompile with -UDEBUG.
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
Well what do you do then if the kernel suddenly goes bonkers one day,
|
|
and clobbers you /usr partition or something awful like that?!
|
|
Commerical un*xes have sanity checks, etc, why shouldn't Linux? Plus, if
|
|
you have a very intermittent problem, the debug stuff might make it
|
|
possible to find out what it is, else you'll never know. You'd have to
|
|
recompile with debugging after the fact and wait for it to happen again.
|
|
That might be an uncomfortable wait for those with mission-critical or
|
|
security related problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: ggw@acpub.duke.edu (G. "Wolfe" Woodbury)
|
|
Subject: Annoying interactive bug in nslookup?
|
|
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 1994 10:43:23 -0500
|
|
Reply-To: ggw@cds.duke.edu
|
|
|
|
I've been using Linux (Slackware 1.1.2 0.99pl15 plus lots of sources)
|
|
on a Pentium for several weeks now. The system is quite stable and
|
|
is in regular use as our internet firewall/gateway machine.
|
|
(Seagate N12400 with Adaptec 1542c SCSI disk, Diamond Stealth video,
|
|
SMC Elite Combo ethernet card, zoom 14.4 modem, STB 4com, tb+)
|
|
|
|
The only annoying thing that I can't find an easy answer/solution for
|
|
is that the nslookup program doesn't like the "enter" key at the end of
|
|
an inquiry (it takes two returns for it to recognize a query.)
|
|
|
|
This has to be a known problem, but I can't find a mention in the NET HowTo
|
|
(or am I blind?) and looking at the code seems to imply that it may be a
|
|
problem in "flex"?
|
|
|
|
Any comments would be appreciated.
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Gregory G. "Wolfe" Woodbury @, but not speaking for Duke Univ.
|
|
System Admin Demographic Studies Box 90408 Durham NC 27708
|
|
ggw@cds.duke.edu ggw@acpub.duke.edu ggw@wolves.durham.nc.us
|
|
"Myth is metaphor, and ritual is the enactment of myth."
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
|
|
From: jmorris@darkstar.rastek.com (Jim Morris)
|
|
Subject: Re: I'm developing UMSDOS Linux Pkg.
|
|
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 1994 17:47:04 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think Patrick has already done what you propose, with the recent
|
|
Slackware 1.1.2 UMSDOS disk set. By using the UMSDOS Boot/Root disk combo,
|
|
as well as a couple of other UMSDOS disks, you can install the Linux Slackware
|
|
distibution (as much or as little as you like of it) onto an MS-DOS formatted
|
|
disk.
|
|
|
|
I believe that he requires you to have 8MB or RAM to install with UMSDOS,
|
|
because if your hard disk is formatted for DOS, odds are you are not going to
|
|
be able to create a swap partition for the install process to use.
|
|
|
|
I also think that Patrick's notes on Slackware 1.1.2 state that the smallest
|
|
UMSDOS installation (UMSDOS and A diskette series) is around 12MB of hard
|
|
disk space.
|
|
|
|
Jim Morris
|
|
(jmorris@rastek.com)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: ftlofaro@unlv.edu (Frank Lofaro)
|
|
Subject: Re: UDP report card
|
|
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 94 21:07:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <2lts98$2dq@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu> jwiegand@opus.temple.edu (The Answer is 42.) writes:
|
|
>In article <CMGMss.KH@aston.ac.uk> evansmp@mb48026.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans) writes:
|
|
>>gans (gans@acf2.nyu.edu) wrote:
|
|
>>
|
|
>>: We've got a situation at NYU where a number of hostile entities
|
|
>>: regularly broadcast 127.0.0.1 over the local net... And some
|
|
>>: linux boxes, including mine, respond (which I do not think is
|
|
>>: correct behavior).
|
|
>>
|
|
>>It is a common problem, 127.0.0.2 can be even more dangerous, quite a few
|
|
>>machines only have 127.0.0.1 rather than 127.0.0.0 as a route to loopback.
|
|
>>Thus such an address can end up going through serveral machines, simply
|
|
>>being forwarded to default routes until it gets to a machine which accepts
|
|
>>it. In some instances telnet 127.0.0.2 will connect you to a (psudo-random)
|
|
>>machine somewhere on the internet.
|
|
>Just out of curiousity, I tried this, and boy was I surprised:
|
|
>
|
|
>opus:~/News jim$ /usr/etc/ping 127.0.0.2
|
|
>ICMP Host Unreachable from gateway Washington2.Dante.net (192.77.156.2)
|
|
> for icmp from opus (129.32.25.70) to 127.0.0.2
|
|
>
|
|
>I don't even know where this machine is at! Couldn't find it w/nslookup
|
|
>on the Suns.
|
|
>
|
|
>jim
|
|
>howabout that
|
|
|
|
Linux USED TO handle 127.x.x.x right for all values of x.
|
|
Now all 127.x.x.x address other than 127.0.0.1 seem to try to send out
|
|
the default route.
|
|
This is bad, can we bring back the old behavior (thus not violating the RFC's
|
|
anymore like we are now)?
|
|
|
|
It was nice, when I could boast Linux networking was the only implementation
|
|
that knew 127.x.x.x was ALWAYS loopback, for all x.
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: ferovick@runner (David C Ferovick)
|
|
Subject: Re: A truely non-debugging Kernel?
|
|
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 1994 22:24:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <1994Mar13.205037.24215@unlv.edu> ftlofaro@unlv.edu (Frank Lofaro) writes:
|
|
>In article <1994Mar12.195624.9113@rpp386> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
|
|
>>In article <DOUG.94Mar11165709@midget.towson.edu> doug@midget.towson.edu (Doug McNaught) writes:
|
|
>>>In article <2loo9h$fo8@aurora.engr.latech.edu> ramos@engr.latech.edu (Alex Ramos) writes:
|
|
>>>
|
|
>>>>Geez! The kernel has _so much_ debugging code (sanity checks, etc) that
|
|
>>>>I wonder how much smaller it could be. It seems most kernel developers
|
|
>>>>have never heard of #ifdef... Just a thought :-)
|
|
>>>
|
|
>>> Well, I'd rather give up some memory and have something that panics
|
|
>>>and shuts itself down rather than blindly hosing my filesystems and/or
|
|
>>>hardware... I *like* sanity checks. A lot.
|
|
>>
|
|
>>That's all or nothing thinking -- ship the kernel with #ifdef DEBUG and
|
|
>>after a few weeks when you are happy, recompile with -UDEBUG.
|
|
>>
|
|
>
|
|
>Well what do you do then if the kernel suddenly goes bonkers one day,
|
|
>and clobbers you /usr partition or something awful like that?!
|
|
>Commerical un*xes have sanity checks, etc, why shouldn't Linux? Plus, if
|
|
>you have a very intermittent problem, the debug stuff might make it
|
|
>possible to find out what it is, else you'll never know. You'd have to
|
|
>recompile with debugging after the fact and wait for it to happen again.
|
|
>That might be an uncomfortable wait for those with mission-critical or
|
|
>security related problems.
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
Well, if there was #ifdef's in there, it would be the USER's choice to run
|
|
witht the debugging code or not...If a user thinks he may have a problem
|
|
or is paranoid about not having the debugging code in the kernel, then they
|
|
can leave it running. If you want to save memory and increase performance,
|
|
then the user can take the risk of #undef'ing the debug code...
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Dave Ferovick
|
|
(ferovick@runner.jpl.utsa.edu)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: eric@tantalus.nrl.navy.mil (Eric Youngdale)
|
|
Subject: Re: Possibly-fatal ISOFS bug +PATCH (Re: A truly non-debugging Kernel?)
|
|
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 1994 22:33:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <2lt8is$6d2@smurf.noris.de> urlichs@smurf.noris.de (Matthias Urlichs) writes:
|
|
>NB: The whole idea of kmalloc()ing the data space for an inode should be
|
|
>ripped out of the isofs code. Returning a random error message on random
|
|
>file system requests, just because memory is low and the files happen to be
|
|
>on a CD-ROM, is not my idea of reliability. The patch affixed below only
|
|
>prevents you from simply crashing instead of getting the error message in a
|
|
>low-mem situation. Better, but not optimal.
|
|
|
|
Since I wrote this, I feel the need to defend what I did. There is a
|
|
basic problem that a cdrom has a sector size of 2048 bytes, and the default
|
|
linux buffer size is 1024 bytes. Before we had the ability to use blocks !=
|
|
1024 bytes, it was sometimes required that we splice together the two halves of
|
|
a 2048 byte sector in order to make sense of the directory entries which span
|
|
the boundary. If instead we tried to use a structure that was split over
|
|
|
|
Note that now we do have the ability to use blocks != 1024 bytes (try
|
|
mount -t iso9660 -o block=2048 /dev/sr0 /mnt). This is still not perfect,
|
|
however because ZMAGIC binaries have a 1024 byte header, and to be able to
|
|
execute binaries directly from a cdrom you generally want to be able to mmap
|
|
the file. Since the first page of the file resides at offset 1024 to
|
|
1024+4096, this means that it would span the region from sector 0, offset 0x400
|
|
to sector 2 offset 0x3ff. Unfortunately this screws up mmap somewhat because
|
|
the buffer cache is not set up to split buffers across page boundaries. In
|
|
less technnical terms you sacrifice demand loading and the sharing of pages
|
|
between the buffer cache and process text pages by using ZMAGIC binaries from a
|
|
cdrom mounted with a 2048 byte blocksize. One way around this is to simply use
|
|
QMAGIC binaries, and if you are cutting a cdrom this would probably be a good
|
|
thing to do. One of the reasons that I modified the kernel/linker/gdb was to
|
|
support this.
|
|
|
|
>The _other_ bug fixed by the patch can bite you anytime. I think the fact
|
|
>that it doesn't seem to have seriously bitten anybody yet is nothing short of
|
|
>amazing.
|
|
|
|
No, I think that kfree is atomic, and until you call some other
|
|
function that requests memory, you can technically still use the memory. It is
|
|
wrong, of course, and I forwarded these patches to Linus, but it does not
|
|
surprise me in the least that no one has encountered this.
|
|
|
|
-Eric
|
|
--
|
|
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep,
|
|
And lines to code before I sleep, And lines to code before I sleep."
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: jp107@amtp.cam.ac.uk (Jon Peatfield)
|
|
Subject: Re: Startup code (DOS boot program)
|
|
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 1994 02:27:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Several people have said "Use bootlin" (mostly by mail.)
|
|
|
|
>>> I've tried the bootlin stuff referenced by the LILO documentation but
|
|
>>> it doesn't work on any of the machines I've tried it on.
|
|
|
|
Is what I said in my initial post. In case it matters the only
|
|
bootlin I can find is dated from early 1992, if there is a more recent
|
|
version perhaps this solves my problems.
|
|
|
|
The problem with bootlin is that it assumes that not much has been
|
|
loaded into the machine when it starts up and it doesn't seem to
|
|
support modern kernels. The reason I suggested the strange order of
|
|
loading:
|
|
|
|
> a. From a DOS executable load the kernel into some memory (may need
|
|
> DOS network devices etc up)
|
|
> b. Make BIOS calls needed by (1) to get parameters.
|
|
> c. Disable interrupts, move myself to beyond 0x098000 (and jump there)
|
|
> d. move kernel to where it wants to live including the first 2.5K at
|
|
> 0x090000 the rest at 0x010000, copy parameters from (b)
|
|
> e. Run the (2) startup code thus starting the kernel.
|
|
|
|
was so that the only calls needing the BIOS or DOS are before we stomp
|
|
on the DOS/BIOS areas of memory. From the lack of positive responce
|
|
that noone else needs this, so I'll go off into a corner and try it
|
|
myself.
|
|
|
|
A couple of people pointed out that QEMM and some other systems might
|
|
get in the way. I don't need to worry about them but others might...
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Jon Peatfield, Computer Officer, the DAMTP, University of Cambridge
|
|
Telephone: (+44 223) 3-37852 Mail: J.S.Peatfield@amtp.cam.ac.uk
|
|
|
|
PP breaks RFC-822 when forwarding SMTP->SMTP mail. PP: Just say NO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: armb@setanta.demon.co.uk (Alan Braggins)
|
|
Subject: Re: Amiga File System, once again
|
|
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 1994 14:59:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <2lmrfu$db9@wizard.uark.edu> dfaulkne@comp..uark.edu (Donald Faulkner) writes:
|
|
> file system is needed. PC users don't need an Amiga file system, and
|
|
> the rest of us who have Amigas can use CrossDos(tm) or MSH, or some
|
|
> other transfer system to create a PC-readable disk. So on the PC side,
|
|
> an Amiga file system is kindof useless.
|
|
|
|
At least one of the questioners had Amiga floppies, but no longer had
|
|
access to an Amiga. I use a Linux PC at work, and would prefer to
|
|
transfer stuff home to an Amiga without having to go through 8+3
|
|
character case-insensitive filenames. So. if such a filesystem could
|
|
be written, it would have (limited) uses.
|
|
|
|
(Someone did ask if minix or ext2 filesystems existed for AmigaDos
|
|
(working in a similar way to CrossDos/MessyDos), but I didn't see an
|
|
answer. It may be a better answer to transferring files LinuxPC -> Amiga.)
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Alan Braggins armb@setanta.demon.co.uk abraggins@cix.compulink.co.uk
|
|
"Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced"
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: jdl@netcom.com (James D. Levine)
|
|
Subject: Help increasing allowed # of processes
|
|
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 1994 22:44:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm trying to increase maximum number of processes for my pl14 kernel,
|
|
with no luck.
|
|
|
|
I found constants called NR_TASKS in tasks.h, and the derived constant
|
|
MAX_TASKS_PER_USER in fork.c. Increasing NR_TASKS and rebuilding the
|
|
kernel does nothing for me. Fork still fails at about 40 total processes.
|
|
|
|
I've put prink's in all branches of fork.c to try to see what's
|
|
happening, but I don't get any messages, so I assume you need to run a
|
|
daemon (syslogd?) to see them.
|
|
|
|
Any pointers?
|
|
|
|
James
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: hedrick@geneva.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick)
|
|
Subject: Re: UDP report card
|
|
Date: 13 Mar 94 22:50:53 GMT
|
|
|
|
ftlofaro@unlv.edu (Frank Lofaro) writes:
|
|
|
|
>Linux USED TO handle 127.x.x.x right for all values of x.
|
|
>Now all 127.x.x.x address other than 127.0.0.1 seem to try to send out
|
|
>the default route.
|
|
>This is bad, can we bring back the old behavior (thus not violating the RFC's
|
|
>anymore like we are now)?
|
|
|
|
I'm not convinced that it's right for 127.0.0.2 to be regarded as
|
|
loopback. But if you want it, you can get it. It's all a matter of
|
|
how you set up routing when you turn on loopback. I just enabled lo
|
|
(which I normally don't have running) using
|
|
|
|
ifconfig lo 127.0.0.1
|
|
route -n add 127.0.0.0 dev lo
|
|
|
|
Ping works equally well to 127.0.0.1 or 127.0.0.200.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: jon@cs.iastate.edu (Jon Green)
|
|
Subject: Re: ircII compilation problems - Fix!
|
|
Date: 12 Mar 94 02:50:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
ekimmina@pms709.pms.ford.com (Eric Kimminau) writes:
|
|
|
|
>I fought with trying to get ircII2.2.9 to compile on Linux 99.14+ for
|
|
>about a week until I saw the Makefile from another person who hadn't
|
|
>had any problems. Every time I would try to compile I was getting a
|
|
>error reported from ld: libl missing. I use irc over ppp, he uses it
|
|
>over term as a side note. After comparing our makefiles, I had to
|
|
>change the LEX= line from lex to flex and the LEX_DEFINE= line from
|
|
>-ll to no arguments.
|
|
|
|
You could have saved yourself a week of time by reading the Makefile:
|
|
# Set this to the lex you want to use, and if they lex uses a library.
|
|
# linux will want LEXLIB set to nothing.
|
|
|
|
LEX = lex
|
|
LEXLIB = -ll
|
|
|
|
I've also made a symlink from /usr/lib/libl.a to /usr/lib/libfl.a for
|
|
the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: jon@cs.iastate.edu (Jon Green)
|
|
Subject: Re: Take a look at this netstat, please...
|
|
Date: 12 Mar 94 02:55:07 GMT
|
|
|
|
psmith@iies.ecn.purdue.edu (Paul Smith) writes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
>Active Internet connections
|
|
>Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address (State)
|
|
>tcp 148 0 eucd.adpc.purdue.:1130 TSX-11.MIT.ED:ftp-data CLOSE_WAIT off (0.00/0) 0
|
|
>tcp 716 0 eucd.adpc.purdue.:1234 wcarchive.cdr:ftp-data CLOSE_WAIT off (0.00/0) 0
|
|
|
|
>I did this netstat at ~3:00 PM (my time). I had performed these
|
|
>two ftp's over *4* hours earlier. Why haven't these closed down?
|
|
|
|
I've noticed the same problem when using term with tredir. If it closes
|
|
unexpectedly, the connection won't close properly and hangs there in
|
|
CLOSE_WAIT. I have to reboot to get the port back. This has also happened
|
|
when running a mud on port 4000 and telnetting to localhost from another
|
|
console (I'm not on a network). What's the deal here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
|
|
|
|
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
|
|
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Development-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development) via:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Development@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
|
|
nic.funet.fi pub/OS/Linux
|
|
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
|
|
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
|
|
|
|
End of Linux-Development Digest
|
|
******************************
|