atom feed24 messages in org.freebsd.freebsd-archRe: kernel printf %i?
FromSent OnAttachments
Alfred PerlsteinJul 10, 2000 3:05 pm 
Brian Fundakowski FeldmanJul 10, 2000 5:16 pm 
Alfred PerlsteinJul 10, 2000 5:35 pm 
Matthew JacobJul 10, 2000 5:50 pm 
Mike SmithJul 10, 2000 5:57 pm 
Alfred PerlsteinJul 10, 2000 6:15 pm 
Greg LeheyJul 10, 2000 6:41 pm 
Assar WesterlundJul 10, 2000 8:04 pm 
Sheldon HearnJul 11, 2000 1:20 am 
Alfred PerlsteinJul 11, 2000 1:32 am 
Mike PritchardJul 11, 2000 2:13 am 
Bruce EvansJul 11, 2000 3:03 am 
Alfred PerlsteinJul 11, 2000 3:18 am 
Bruce EvansJul 11, 2000 9:32 am 
Marius BendiksenJul 11, 2000 1:30 pm 
Dag-Erling SmorgravJul 12, 2000 12:29 am 
Thomas M. SommersJul 12, 2000 2:59 pm 
Thomas M. SommersJul 12, 2000 4:08 pm 
John-Mark GurneyJul 12, 2000 8:53 pm 
Alexander LangerJul 17, 2000 1:24 am 
Alfred PerlsteinJul 17, 2000 2:40 am 
Alexander LangerJul 17, 2000 2:43 am 
Bruce EvansJul 18, 2000 3:29 am 
Alexander LangerJul 18, 2000 3:32 am 
Subject:Re: kernel printf %i?
From:Brian Fundakowski Feldman (gre@FreeBSD.org)
Date:Jul 10, 2000 5:16:49 pm
List:org.freebsd.freebsd-arch

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 :-/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message