similar to: BK tree is in sync again

It's now in sync with 2.5.71. bk://klibc.bkbits.net/2.5-klibc <b

Hi, Greg - I have a 2.5.70 BK repository, with klibc integrated, at: bk://klibc.bkbits.net/2.5-klibc This repo has the following features: * Completely up-to-date w.r.t. klibc itself. * Kbuild sort of happy, but still needs an eyeball from Kai to figure out why it always rebuilds everything in usr/. * Supports both IP autoconfig and NFS root from initramfs.

klibc integrated with the kernel can now be found at: http://linux-sam.bkbits.net Se the repository: klibc. For non-BK users the patches can be retreived using the following links: klibc on top of 2.6.8-rc2: http://linux-sam.bkbits.net:8080/klibc/gnupatch@41098c67CQHEC6lH2E3rfIXcnRW1RA kbuild adaptions to klibc: http://linux-sam.bkbits.net:8080/klibc/gnupatch@4109923a7O1XqfXw_V7JzAmet_AzbA

Hi all. I have pushed my earlier announced kbuild improvements patch to: bk://linux-sam.bkbits.net/2.5-klibc First cset is the earlier posted cset, whit a few small modifications. One important change is that the usr/Makefile now uses *.a files in initramfs-y assignment. I realised that the purpose was to express what kinit were using / referring. Second cset is a trivial cset that just move

Hi all, I'm a bit concerned about the following statement included in 2.6.0-test4: +For active users, you are better off using the klibc BitKeeper +repositories, at http://klibc.bkbits.net/ Since I refuse to use bk because I consider the anti-competition clause in the free bk license to (a) be abhorrent and (b) meaning that it's of at best questionable legality for me to use free BK,

This seem to be a good timing taking up the integration of klibc in the kernel again. Based one klibc-0.152 and klibc.bkbits.net/2.5-klibc I will take a shot of it. I will focus on getting the library compiled (should be pretty straighforward). Next two steps are: 2) Adding minimum applications to the kernel (if any) 3) Support applications outside the kernel I will put my work on bkbits.net

BTW, the xenlinux-2.6.11.bk''s version is: ChangeSet@1.2085, 2005-05-12 11:10:24-06:00, djm@kirby.fc.hp.com More work on hyperprivops Signed-off-by: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@hp.com> Thanks, Kevin >-----Original Message----- >From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com >[mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Tian, Kevin >Sent: Friday,

Yes, like real Linux/ia64, it is not possible to run the same Xenlinux bits both on ski and on real hardware. A different configuration and build is required. The config difference is the same as it was with the privified xenlinux... I think you did that successfully before (with privified xenlinux) so give that config file a try and if it doesn''t work, let me know. BTW, I think I know

On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 05:26:32PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Greg has taken on the job of integrating klibc with the kernel, but > please post klibc bug reports to the klibc mailing list at > <klibc@zytor.com>. To avoid annoying warning from gcc I had to check for compatibility with -falign-* like we do in arch/i386/Makefile. check_usergcc located in top-level makefile to

I''ve just finished Xeno-HOWTO which contains a detailed list of instructions on how to setting up Xen and XenoLinux, from downloading Bitkeeper, compilation of Xen, XenoLinux, tools to configuration, start and stop of new domains. A complete version has just been pushed in xeno.bk and xeno-1.1.bk in our Laboratory. A partital version is already available in

v173 doesn't build on current 2.6 Linus BK on x86 Complaints about undeclared __le64, __le32, __be64, __be32, __be16 What am I doing wrong? In file included from ../linux/include/asm/byteorder.h:57, from ../klibc/include/endian.h:9, from ../klibc/include/netinet/in.h:13, from ../klibc/include/arpa/inet.h:11, from

There are two hosted BitKeeper repos: klibc is a BK clone of the klibc CVS tree 2.5-klibc is my attempts to integrate klibc into the kernel If you want commit access to either repo, send me an ssh1 public key. <b

I've spent some time looking at klibc today, and find myself in a state of some puzzlement. The 0.79 snapshot does not build against 2.5.68; it fails almost immediately, apparently due to problems with include files. I'm hesitant to try patching anything to get it building, because I can find no sign of a CVS or BK repo that I can check against, and I don't want to replicate

On Sun, 2003-05-25 at 17:07, Kai Germaschewski wrote: > I basically did a complete integration of klibc into kbuild two or so > months ago - however, I didn't touch it since, so it won't apply cleanly. > I can dig out the bk tree, if you're interested. I've put my own latest integrate-klibc-into-kbuild BK patch up at

On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 01:06:15AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >> > >> I strongly recommend that you just copy the asm files from > >> arch/alpha/lib instead of whatever horribleness is going on > >> here attempting to frob compiler output. > > > > Hm, I don't know what the build is doing, that would be Kai's section. > > > >

If you only run released (rather than development) versions of rsync then you can skip this message. rsync's source tree has been converted from CVS to BitKeeper. This message contains brief instructions for people who want to track development or make contributions. I think it should take about 30-60 minutes to get started with BK. I hope you will agree that it is worthwhile. First

Hi hpa and others. With my ongoing work to prepare for potential integration of klibc in the kernel I wonder if there wold be any interest in using part of the kbuild infrastructure to build the vanilla klibc? The rationale is obvious: - common codebase for Kbuild files, so one only has to fix things in one place - I force klibc developers to create Kbuild files usable in the kernel - Much

Hi Xen people, I can read in the Xen 3.0 Roadmap that "A port to IA64 is making good progress". I have found nothing about IA-64 support in the "bk://xen.bkbits.net/xeno-unstable.bk" repository. Could you tell if an advanced version for IA-64 is available and where the source files can downloaded from ? Regards Jean-Paul Pigache

Please, someone can help me to resolve this systemd issue? It's possible disable the "piece of software" of systemd that unmount my backup disk a second after I mount it? Many thanks Il giorno ven, 01/04/2016 alle 14.03 +0200, Dario Lesca ha scritto: > On a server Centos 7.2 ?I insert my 1Tb usb disk and run > > sudo mount LABEL=bk-benvet-01 /mnt/bk-benvet-01 > >

Hello, I have attached a patch wich adds support for 4kb pages to xen 2.0 proper. (No changes were required from xen 2.0-beta. Apprently mixing xenolinux from one release and xen kernel from another release is a no-no. Other than that there were no problems. Thanks to Rupert Schlick for helping to nail it down. The "noacpi" parameter does not seem to be mandatory. Finally