devel

devel@lists.centos.org

2 participants
4653 discussions

Can I do computation with giant integer in kernel?
by YANG 21 Feb '11

21 Feb '11

I need compute some **polynomials using giant integer with power of numbers perhaps. I found GMP library can do this in user mode. How about in kernel? Is there any existing codes? Or, I should keep the computation in user mode and use netlink to let kernel pass the task to application for computing and wait for result asynchronously. But I worry about efficience by using this method. Does it cause mode switch frequently, even on multi-core cpu chip?

2 1

Ja oder nein: is cygwin-setup process a viable alternative to present day builds?
by Larry Vaden 19 Feb '11

19 Feb '11

This question keys off IIRC Johnny's remarks earlier in the day about how much work it is to build a release. This question is addressed to those build gurus on this list who have forgotten more about the build process than this poster will ever know and further have first hand knowledge|experience with cygwin-setup. Because 4 of our servers are Windows boxen running IIS (to enable small business folks to build web sites with Front Page), considerable fondness for the cygwin build process has developed to the extent that Windows commands via CLI and GUI are hardly ever done. At the end of the day, other than RPM package management, what are the substantial differences that would preclude a cygwin-setup-like build process from being used to build and maintain the release and would it be a lot faster and less labor intensive? kind regards/ldv/vaden(a)texoma.net

5 8

Re: [CentOS-devel] [CentOS] Any update on 5.6 / 6?
by Benjamin Donnachie 17 Feb '11

17 Feb '11

On 16 February 2011 14:58, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists(a)karan.org> wrote: > So what happened in the early days of when EL6 came out - we asked > people to help, there were many threads on how people could get involved > ( on the centos-devel list, which is - I am sure you will agree, the > appropriate place ). Nothing happened, not one person beyond the > usual-people actually did anything. Unfortunately, I wasn't a member of this list then so missed the call for help. I would certainly like to help with CentOS and previously looked after a number of packages for cAos. I appreciate that now isn't a good time as you are all very busy and I'm currently moving house so I won't be much immediate help. Take care, Ben

1 0

php53 / bind97
by Karanbir Singh 03 Feb '11

03 Feb '11

hi, php53 and bind97 from the 5.6/ tree are available in the c5-testing repo, so test away. Consider the pkgs as mostly production ready, but features that rely on other new pkgs or updates in 5.6 may not work. If you run into one, let us know either on the list here, or in #centos-devel on irc.freenode.net - KB

4 9

Re: [CentOS-devel] php53-pear.spec
by James Findley 01 Feb '11

01 Feb '11

It's a legacy from the original fedora rpm dating back many versions, back to when php was still using cvs. It's good practice to have a comment explaining where the file comes from, but I will update that line to the new svn one. I've attached the fixed spec. ----- Original Message ----- From: James Hogarth Sent: 02/01/11 01:32 PM To: The CentOS developers mailing list. Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] php53-pear.spec On 1 February 2011 13:24, James Findley <sixy(a)gmx.com> wrote: > > Ok, this time I actually did attach the spec.... > Hmm a little more complicated ;) The wget commented out doesn't actually hit anything (gets a 404) is this really needed? Looks good at first glace - not set up a build env yet to check how it builds - but based on spec I'm happy to keep an eye on upstream and test/build as co-maintainer as per our IRC chat. James _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

2 1

Re: [CentOS-devel] php53-pear.spec
by James Findley 01 Feb '11

01 Feb '11

Ok, this time I actually did attach the spec.... ----- Original Message ----- From: sixy(a)gmx.com Sent: 02/01/11 01:14 PM To: centos-devel(a)centos.org Subject: [CentOS-devel] php53-pear.spec Spec attached. It's rpmlint clean, and builds fine in mock. --siXy

2 1

php53-pear.spec
by sixy＠gmx.com 01 Feb '11

01 Feb '11

Spec attached. It's rpmlint clean, and builds fine in mock. --siXy

2 1

Re: [CentOS-devel] A new look for CentOS (was Re: Italian Translation Team)
by Ralph Angenendt 01 Feb '11

01 Feb '11

On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Andrea Veri <av(a)gnome.org> wrote: > The point now is: which kind of software should the main website use if > the decision would be to give it a new look. Well, IMHO the best solution > at the moment would be to use drupal, it's easy to use and it has anything > needed to make a website rocking. (I've also been using it for a while and I > can tell drupal is a great CMS software) Not wanting to chase you away, this is probably best discussed on centos-devel. There have been discussions and also a test machine for getting the forums out of the main website (php-bb seemed the way to go for that at the moment), because that has to be done before website redesign. There hasn't been a real discussion or decision on which software the main website should run on. Preferrably something which can be "updated" easily, even more preferrably if it can be done so via package management. > The second point would be to setup a test istance with a CMS software on it > to start working on the new website. (unfortunately i don't have any machine > or host handy to run it) That is where we can step in. At least a vm is possible. But as said, this discussion should happen on the centos-devel mailing list, I'll crosspost this mail there. Regards, Ralph

11 41

A new look for CentOS: Main discussion
by Andrea Veri 30 Jan '11

30 Jan '11

hi, after a talk on #centos-devel with Ralph and Karanbir, we've decided to send out a mail with all the details we might want to discuss on the list. Here are a few points: 1. Who will take the responsibility to coordinate the work and the ipothetic team we could set up to make this possible. I offered to cover that role and I will do my best to have everything working. 2. Karanbir suggested that around 3-4 people should be involved in the project, mostly: 2a. developer / coder on the platform 2b. a sysadmin type person ( James Hogarth (james.hogarth(a)gmail.com) offered to help out with this role) 3c. atleast 1 UI person 4d atleast one design person in the website SIG if you are willing to help out, please state your intentions on this mail! 3. cms software to use, many proposals have been made to the list about which software the new website should use. This is actually up to the official CentOS developers but looks like drupal is the platform that took more +1 to the list since now. (it also has LDAP integration which seemed to be the bottleneck for Ralph in the previous try to renew the website) 4. What the website should contain that it is not on the wiki? We will have to set up a wiki page with all ideas and opinions about this to avoid adding useless content. 5. Having the infrastructure up and running. This is an important point since we can spend words and words on the mailing list or irc but we need to make our ideas effective, otherwise we will get back to the old situation. (i.e stuck after 3 years) 6. I / we think that it is not time to change, I know it will take time, much time and even months but we need to start making this happen. well, that's all. Please contribute to the discussion, any idea or proposal is welcome but please avoid to send out a post commenting which software should be used or not. (this call will be made by official centos developers like Ralph or Karanbir) We need to know if anyone is willing to help and give some time to the project and also we want to hear your ideas about the website content, what do you think it will be useful to have on the website, what's not,what should go to the wiki etc. We need a website that does something and provide useful informations for newcomers and for experienced users, a website which is nice and handy at the same time. Let's make this happen altogether. Andrea

6 9

PATCH Missing ISO 9660 Image
by Vijay N. Majagaonkar 30 Jan '11

30 Jan '11

Hi All, I posted PATCH for missing ISO 9660 image, But not got any response for this patch :( https://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=29925&forum=37 It will be great help if i get some reply or feedback for this Patch, Thanks for the help V!jay.

2 3

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

devel