Re: SHM and programs unable to attach to shm segments

From: Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Date: Thu Mar 16 2000 - 21:07:27 EST

Next message: watermodem: "Re: [PATCH] zip drives"
Previous message: Scott Lurndal: "Re: If something is not stated in POSIX we should not bother even if 90%+ of Linux"
In reply to: Bruno Haible: "Re: SHM and programs unable to attach to shm segments"
Reply: Andre Hedrick: "Re: SHM and programs unable to attach to shm segments"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> Linux has done the same kind of resource management in the past with
> shmids. If you don't want to continue supporting that, can you give
> the application developers a way to create shared memory with equally
> low administration overhead?

I've sent Linus the patches to do this. DaveM fixed them and I fixed
the remaining bugs and sent it to Linus again.

So it should be fixed for 99-2-3

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: watermodem: "Re: [PATCH] zip drives"
Previous message: Scott Lurndal: "Re: If something is not stated in POSIX we should not bother even if 90%+ of Linux"
In reply to: Bruno Haible: "Re: SHM and programs unable to attach to shm segments"
Reply: Andre Hedrick: "Re: SHM and programs unable to attach to shm segments"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:00:22 EST