Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 18:15:33 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kernel printf %i? Message-ID: <20000710181533.K25571@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <200007110057.RAA08039@mass.osd.bsdi.com>; from msmith@FreeBSD.org on Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 05:57:27PM -0700 References: <20000710173553.J25571@fw.wintelcom.net> <200007110057.RAA08039@mass.osd.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.org> [000710 17:49] wrote: > > * Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@FreeBSD.org> [000710 17:17] wrote: > > > On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > > > > > > any objections: > > > > > > Can you give me a good reason for it? To act like the libc printf() isn't > > > a good reason, I mean do you think it will actually help anyone in ways > > > that %d doesn't? Are you noticing tons of submissions of kernel code that > > > have %i and don't work correctly or something? > > > > > > I just don't get it :-/ > > > > I was annoyed when I used %i and it didn't work. POLA. > > Can I have %Z? It should take an integer argument, and print that many > 'fnord's. Thankyou. Sure, do you want it as a seperate commit or can I bundle it with the 'i' addition? :) Basically what I'm getting is that %i isn't portable over to other systems? In that case I guess it's not needed, I just expected %i to work as it does in libc. But if you need that %Z hack, I can have a delta ready for you to review in a couple of minutes. let me know, -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000710181533.K25571>