From: UnixOS2 Archive To: "UnixOS2 Archive" Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 04:36:56 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [UnixOS2_Archive] No. 316 ************************************************** Sunday 01 September 2002 Number 316 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: Linux setup newbie Q : Voytek Eymont 2 Re: Linux setup newbie Q : Stefan Neis 3 Re: Some packages : Stefan Neis **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 13:09:22 From: Voytek Eymont Subject: Re: Linux setup newbie Q ** Reply to note from Stefan Neis Sun, 1 Sep 2002 17:38:12 +0200 (CEST) > > where do I set a Linux system to 'REIPL ON' ? > > You don't. Stefan, why not ? my RedHat machine fell over with some kernel panic message, and, just sat there, I'd rather log the error, and, restart the machine with out having to go there. surely there must be something like that ? I understand Unix systems do that. also, thanks for the other suggestions, I'll check/try Voytek Eymont SBT Information Systems Pty Ltd http://www.sbt.net.au/links/ phone +61-2 9310-1144 fax +61-2 9310-1118 **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 20:25:59 +0200 (CEST) From: Stefan Neis Subject: Re: Linux setup newbie Q On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Voytek Eymont wrote: > > > > where do I set a Linux system to 'REIPL ON' ? > > > > You don't. > > Stefan, > > why not ? > > my RedHat machine fell over with some kernel panic message, and, just sat > there, I'd rather log the error, and, restart the machine with out having > to go there. Well, I can understand why you would like to have that feature. It's just that I don't know how to turn it on - _if_ it does exist, which I doubt. Thinking about it, there _should_ be some such beast, but I really don't know. Regards, Stefan **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 20:33:49 +0200 (CEST) From: Stefan Neis Subject: Re: Some packages On Sun, 1 Sep 2002, Andreas Buening wrote: > larger executables but this won't really hurt us. I propose to > use those extensions, put all of them into one lib ux2 and > just use -lux2 for every package we have. At least, it should be a different name, I suppose, otherwise there might be a clash later. > > Which the compiler should automatically append anyway, once there is > > an established distribution. > > We are far away from it. Closer to it than ever before. ;-) > One of the reasons why Linux is that successful is because of > the philosophy "if there is a problem fix it". If a function > /option is missing somebody adds this feature. End of story. Yes. But you still shouldn't mix BSD and GNU library functions in the same library, that was my point. Of course, it would make perfect sense, but FSF doesn't allow it. Pu GNU stuff in a different DLL, that's what I was getting at ... > You could just add those functions to the emx dlls without > hurting the backward compatibility. So why don't we do it? IMHO, modifying EMX dll's is EM's prerogative.... I could create a cExt.dll from my Posix/2 library, if people are interested ... Regards, Stefan