[openbeosnetteam] Re: Progress report
- From: "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeosnetteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 16:32:22 CET (+0100)
> > Me too, and for a reworked naming scheme (proper prefixes, init/
> > shutdown calls: right now, we have destroy, delete, shutdown,
> > whatever).
> yes, I'm aware and have tried to tidy up in my recent changes...
Nice!
> This isn't as easy as it sounds :( I've had to have a lot of these as
> functions from core, which isn't a problem, it's just a long list.
> why? We
> want all mbufs centrally allocated, and so any function that touches
> an
> allocation/free must be done by the core code.
Why? As long as all the mbufs are allocated in the kernel, where is the
problem?
> The kernel defines a timer and so I've used that for the kernel code
> so far.
> I'm guessing that's where you got your idea from?:)
Not really - but that makes the net_timer superfluous :)
> Hope you're feeling better soon.
Me too, thanks!
Adios...
Axel.
Other related posts:
