IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
This means that when those targets are built, all the sources are built again,
instead of reusing the work done to create libbasic.a and other convenience static
libraries. It would be nice to not do this, but there seems to be no support in
our toolchain for joining multiple static libraries into one. When linking
a static library, any -l arguments are simply ignored by ar/gcc-ar, and .a
libraries given as positional arguments are copied verbatim into the archive
so they objects in them cannot be accessed.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2157629/linking-static-libraries-to-other-static-libraries
suggests either unzipping all the archives and putting them back togather,
or using a linker script. Unzipping and zipping back together seems ugly.
The other option is not very nice. The linker script language does not
allow "+" to appear in the filenames, and filenames that meson generates
use that, so files would have to be renamed before a linker script was used.
And we would have to generate the linker script on the fly. Either way, this
doesn't seem attractive. Since those static libraries are a niche use case,
it seems reasonable to just go with the easiest and safest solution and
recompile all the source files. Thanks to ccache, this is probably almost as
cheap as actually reusing the convenience .a libraries.
test-libsystemd-sym.c and test-libudev-sym.c compile fine with the generated
static libs, so it seems that they indeed provide all the symbols they should.
When multiple configuration file groups are shown together (e.g.
systemd-analyze cat-config systemd/system.conf systemd/user.conf), it's nice
to separate them visually.
I tried first to write a line of spaces and underline that. This does not look
too good, because the line is too low. Then I tried a block of blue-background
spaces. In this version, there are two lines, one is full of spaces and
underlined, so visually we get an empty line in the middle.
I then tried underlining the last line of the previous file. This does not look
right, unless the line is full width, i.e. unless spaces are written out until
the end of the line. But when those spaces are added, it's not clear if they
were part of the original file or not. Here, the spaces are between groups, so
it seems less likely that somebody will mistake those spaces for part of the
configuration file.
This patch add support to enables to send User Class option code 77
RFC 3004.
This option MAY carry multiple User Classes.
The format of this option is as follows:
Code Len Value
+-----+-----+--------------------- . . . --+
| 77 | N | User Class Data ('Len' octets) |
+-----+-----+--------------------- . . . --+
where Value consists of one or more instances of User Class Data.
Each instance of User Class Data is formatted as follows:
UC_Len_i User_Class_Data_i
+--------+------------------------ . . . --+
| L_i | Opaque-Data ('UC_Len_i' octets) |
+--------+------------------------ . . . --+
UserClass=
A DHCPv4 client can use UserClass option to identify the type or category of user or applications
it represents. The information contained in this option is an string that represents the user class
of which the client is a member. Each class sets an identifying string of information to be used by the DHCP service to classify clients. Takes a whitespace-separated list.
UserClass= hello world how are you
Closes: RFC: #5134
