Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>
> Thyer, Matthew writes:
> > So the answer is a name service caching daemon ala nscd on Solaris.
> >
>
> Or linux. Apparently, there is an nscd in glibc. Perhaps somebody
> with motivation could determine if its any good. If so, they could
> chop it out of glibc, ma
On Thu, 04 Oct 2001 12:33:56 CST, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> > What are *you* doing to address the problem? Are you stepping up as a
> > maintainer?
>
> Yes. If you read the list archives you will see I've done so
> twice in the past already.
This looks good. I can think of several people who
Greetings:
I was wondering which options in make.conf do I need to enable to
get the same kerberos that is in the binary snapshots of -RELEASE and
-CURRENT? Is it IV I need or is it 5 or both? Thanks.
Cheers,
Vince - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Vice President __
Un
Sorry,
>2) log() in rev 1.67 or later
>
> log() ---> the log buffer ONLY
This should be
2) log() in rev 1.67 or later
log() ---> the log buffer ONLY, if a process is reading it
log() ---> /dev/console ONLY, if no process is reading the log buffer
Kazu
To Unsubscribe: sen
>>In rev 1.67 and later, the message goes to the log buffer only if a
>>process is reading the log buffer. If no process is reading, the
>>message goes to the console ONLY, and it is not put into the log
>>buffer. This behavior is inconsistent with the above comment. Is this
>>a bug introduced i
I got another panic on my yesterday's -current. At this time, I made
a kernel with "device vlan".
db> t
vlan_input(c0e73800,..) at vlan_input+0x42
ether_demux(c156b000,...) at ether_demux+0x12a
ether_input(c156b000,...) at ether_input+0x5a
wi_rxeof(c156000,...) at wi_rxeof+0x1b7
wi_intr(c156b00
On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 12:03:02AM +0200, Bernd Walter wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 01:19:15PM -0700, Crist J. Clark wrote:
[snip]
> > That wouldn't work. The whole point of /var/run/named is to set the
> > permissions on the directory such that a non-root user (the 'bind'
> > user in FreeBS
< said:
> Actually, I *desperately* want a way to turn this off.
I agree (somewhat less emphatically) and even filed a PR about a
related issue.
-GAWollman
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 01:19:15PM -0700, Crist J. Clark wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 06:17:13PM +0200, Leif Neland wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Jun Kuriyama wrote:
> > > At Thu, 4 Oct 2001 11:21:19 + (UTC),
> > > Bernd Walter wrote:
> > > > I run an md based filesystem for /var/run so i
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 06:17:13PM +0200, Leif Neland wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Jun Kuriyama wrote:
>
> > At Thu, 4 Oct 2001 11:21:19 + (UTC),
> > Bernd Walter wrote:
> > > I run an md based filesystem for /var/run so it is empty after startup.
> > > Does that mean that I also need t
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kazutaka Y
OK
> OTA writes:
>
> >In rev 1.67 and later, the message goes to the log buffer only if a
> >process is reading the log buffer. If no process is reading, the
> >message goes to the console ONLY, and it is not put into the l
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kazutaka YOK
OTA writes:
>In rev 1.67 and later, the message goes to the log buffer only if a
>process is reading the log buffer. If no process is reading, the
>message goes to the console ONLY, and it is not put into the log
>buffer. This behavior is inconsistent
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 12:14:49PM -0600, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> > I'm talking about the one in FreeBSD.
> > uux job is to setup the commands for the next site and break the
> > next sitename if it equals 8 letters.
>
> That's strange. For over two years I've talked hourly to a pair
> of UUCP
> > What are *you* doing to address the problem? Are you stepping up as a
> > maintainer?
>
> Yes. If you read the list archives you will see I've done so
> twice in the past already.
>
> > Are you willing to fix the problems with UUCP in FreeBSD as it is
>
> Yes.
>
> > How much time are you willi
> What are *you* doing to address the problem? Are you stepping up as a
> maintainer?
Yes. If you read the list archives you will see I've done so
twice in the past already.
> Are you willing to fix the problems with UUCP in FreeBSD as it is
Yes.
> How much time are you willing to contribute?
> > I don't get your point - what is wrong with having it a port?
>
> Well, here's one reason:
>
> 1) Remove all the network interfaces from your system (Ethernet,
> PPP, SL/IP, etc).
>
> 2) cd into /usr/ports and try to build UUCP.
>
> Unless you have a prepopulated /usr/ports/distfiles, it
> Again I ask: if maintenance is an issue, why would you not even
> attempt to find a maintainer?
How do you "find a maintainer"? Do you run a contest on your favourite TV
channel or what? Maintainers appear by themselves or they don't. Considering
how long UUCP has been unmaintained, they don't
> > Just like with anonymous FTP, don't make it world writable if you don't
> > want the world writing to it.
>
> Right - that's what actually was done.
> Don't install it unless you need.
Oh give me a break. You do not disable anonymous FTP uploads by
'rm /usr/libexec/ftpd'.
> I'm talking abou
Hello.
I have submitted a PR (bin/31009) with a followup including the patch.
Hoping you have time to fix this soon...
jkh = Jordan Hubbard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
jkh> mostly empty. Now that devfs is the default, phk needs to update
jkh> libdisk so that it doesn't attempt to make the devic
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 10:56:15AM -0600, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> > There are many other points - some examples I know of:
> > The /var/spool/uucppublic which is writeable by everyone.
> > Usually you don't want this.
>
> Just like with anonymous FTP, don't make it world writable if you don't
>
On 04-Oct-01 Jun Kuriyama wrote:
>
> I tried to use mount_ntfs, but it panic'ed.
NTFS and NWFS are currently broken in -current due to the KSE stuff. Please
don't use them for now.
--
John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpke
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 04:09:56PM +0200, Bernd Walter wrote:
> That's annoying if it becomes popular for services to use their own
> subdirectory.
It would be much better to get rid of pidfiles altogether. They have all sorts
of nasty problems.
--
Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/S
> There are many other points - some examples I know of:
> The /var/spool/uucppublic which is writeable by everyone.
> Usually you don't want this.
Just like with anonymous FTP, don't make it world writable if you don't
want the world writing to it.
> Ever received a mail with an envelope like "
And the QLogic isp firmware (which has gotten quite large, what with separate
firmware for 3 different SCSI and 3 different Fibre Channel cards)
On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Alexander Langer wrote:
> Thus spake Jordan Hubbard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > Sure, I just don't have time to work on this right
On Thu, 04 Oct 2001, Jun Kuriyama wrote:
> I tried to use mount_ntfs, but it panic'ed.
>
>
> % sudo mount -t ntfs /dev/ad0s1 /mnt
> % cd /mnt
> % ls -la
> panic: lockmgr: pid 551, not exclusive lock holder 470 unlocking
> Debugger("panic")
> Stopped at Debugger+0x44: pushl%ebx
> db> t
> Deb
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:36:26PM -0600, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> All these "solutions" assume that everyone is wired up with IP
> connectivity. The original questions was "who uses UUCP?"
Me.
> UUCP has many valid uses. Even today. If you don't understand the
> software, that's fine with me.
On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Jun Kuriyama wrote:
> At Thu, 4 Oct 2001 11:21:19 + (UTC),
> Bernd Walter wrote:
> > I run an md based filesystem for /var/run so it is empty after startup.
> > Does that mean that I also need to take care of creating directories in
> > it during boot - and maintaining m
> UUCP has many valid uses. Even today. If you don't understand the
> software, that's fine with me. Just don't use your ignorance as
> an excuse to dike the software out. Or more precisely, admit
> you want to rip the code out because you don't understand what
> it is, rather than making up speci
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 10:16:25PM +0900, Jun Kuriyama wrote:
> At Thu, 4 Oct 2001 11:21:19 + (UTC),
> Bernd Walter wrote:
> > I run an md based filesystem for /var/run so it is empty after startup.
> > Does that mean that I also need to take care of creating directories in
> > it during boot
Thus spake Jordan Hubbard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Sure, I just don't have time to work on this right now.
Didn't someone recently submit a patch to sysinstall for
kernel modules shipped on a third floppy?
Most exotic hardware in GENERIC could then be migrated to klds.
Alex
To Unsubscribe: send
I tried to use mount_ntfs, but it panic'ed.
% sudo mount -t ntfs /dev/ad0s1 /mnt
% cd /mnt
% ls -la
panic: lockmgr: pid 551, not exclusive lock holder 470 unlocking
Debugger("panic")
Stopped at Debugger+0x44: pushl%ebx
db> t
Debugger() at Debugger+0x44
panic(c02ef100,227,c02ef0e0,1d6,cab5f
At Thu, 4 Oct 2001 11:21:19 + (UTC),
Bernd Walter wrote:
> I run an md based filesystem for /var/run so it is empty after startup.
> Does that mean that I also need to take care of creating directories in
> it during boot - and maintaining myself on every box.
> Or it it the responsibility of
Thyer, Matthew writes:
> So the answer is a name service caching daemon ala nscd on Solaris.
>
Or linux. Apparently, there is an nscd in glibc. Perhaps somebody
with motivation could determine if its any good. If so, they could
chop it out of glibc, make it into a port & add hooks to our l
Hi Marcel,
> What if you try it with linux_base-7?
I've now more results.
- The port "works" with old and new linux_base port, I it get started
the right way.
- Starting an install without -net does segfault suddenly.
- Starting a user-install does segfault after registering the scripts.
-
I run an md based filesystem for /var/run so it is empty after startup.
Does that mean that I also need to take care of creating directories in
it during boot - and maintaining myself on every box.
Or it it the responsibility of the programms to enshure that the
directories they need are created?
35 matches
Mail list logo
