On Mon, Jul 05, 1999 at 08:59:41PM +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
> [-current cc'd - please don't make this a big thread !]
> /etc/start_if.tun0 with an ``exec ppp ...''. This starts things up
> at the correct point.
>
> However, maybe it's time for a knob in rc.conf ? Something like
>
> ppp_enab
> -Original Message-
> From: Josef Karthauser [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 1999 11:38 AM
> To: Brian Somers
> Cc: Mark Thomas; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wayne Self
> Subject: Re: userland ppp - startup
>
> Something like this should do it. It may be nice to also
On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 11:46:27AM +0200, Ladavac Marino wrote:
>
> > Something like this should do it. It may be nice to also allow the
> > authname/authkey to be specified on the command line so that they
> > can easily be set in rc.conf, by hand or by sysinstall.
> >
> [ML] You do not
> -Original Message-
> From: Josef Karthauser [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 1999 11:53 AM
> To: Ladavac Marino
> Cc: Brian Somers; Mark Thomas; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wayne
> Self
> Subject: Re: userland ppp - startup
>
> On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 11:46:27AM +020
On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 12:20:35PM +0200, Ladavac Marino wrote:
> [ML] Don't know about sppp, but the only halfway secure way to
> keep this sensitive data is in a file readable by root, and having the
> program which needs it setuid root. Sounds a lot like
> /etc/ppp/ppp.conf, doesn't it?
> -Original Message-
> From: Josef Karthauser [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 1999 1:22 PM
> To: Ladavac Marino
> Cc: Brian Somers; Mark Thomas; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wayne
> Self
> Subject: Re: userland ppp - startup
>
> On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 12:20:35PM +0200
On 07-Jul-99 Ladavac Marino wrote:
>> It does :) That said doesn't sysinstall using ppp to do a net
>> install?
>> How does it setup username/password, etc.
> [ML] It asks for it in a dialog box, IIRC (never having used it
>:)
sysinstall drops you into ppp and you have to use the
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> I just cvsup'd today hoping that all the NFS fixes that went in
> recently would have alleviated (sp?) the hangs I've been getting
> while building things in ports for the last couple of months.
>
> It used to be that just NFS would hang, now it seems to crash the
>
On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >
> > I just cvsup'd today hoping that all the NFS fixes that went in
> > recently would have alleviated (sp?) the hangs I've been getting
> > while building things in ports for the last couple of months.
> >
> > It used to be th
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
>
> > Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > >
> > > I just cvsup'd today hoping that all the NFS fixes that went in
> > > recently would have alleviated (sp?) the hangs I've been getting
> > > while building things in ports for the last coupl
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
> >
> > > > attempting to compile xscreensaver has triggered it twice in a row
> > > > /usr/ports is mounted off "server" (a freebsd -current box) and
> > > > doing the make will kill the ma
On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> Hmm... how to do this then? The sppp setup code in rc.* allows
> username/password to be specified. Can it be done in the environment
> then? (If rc.conf is visable then the sppp config gives usernames and
> passwords away as it stands today.)
Eve
On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Ladavac Marino wrote:
> [ML] You do not really want these on the command line for
> everyone to see with ps. (nor in rc.conf for everyone to see with e.g.
> cat)
Why is rc.conf readable by world?!
- alex
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscr
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
> >
> > > Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I just cvsup'd today hoping that all the NFS fixes that went in
> > > > recently would have alleviated (sp?) the hangs I've been getting
>
On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 01:19:02PM -0700, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Ladavac Marino wrote:
>
> > [ML] You do not really want these on the command line for
> > everyone to see with ps. (nor in rc.conf for everyone to see with e.g.
> > cat)
>
> Why is rc.conf readable by world?!
Hello,
todays current breaks in build of libgcc
===> gnu/lib/libgcc
c++ -O2 -mpentium -fpcc-struct-return -ffast-math -fno-strength-reduce -malign-jumps=4
-malign-loops=4 -malign-functions=4
-I/usr/src/gnu/lib/libgcc/../../../contrib/egcs/gcc/cp/inc -nostdinc++ -c
/usr/src/gnu/lib/libgcc/../.
> On Mon, Jul 05, 1999 at 08:59:41PM +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
> > [-current cc'd - please don't make this a big thread !]
> > /etc/start_if.tun0 with an ``exec ppp ...''. This starts things up
> > at the correct point.
> >
> > However, maybe it's time for a knob in rc.conf ? Something like
>
On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Keith Stevenson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 01:19:02PM -0700, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Ladavac Marino wrote:
> >
> > > [ML] You do not really want these on the command line for
> > > everyone to see with ps. (nor in rc.conf for everyone to see with e
I can very reliable reproduce a process getting stuck in this state. The
box it is running on is a k6-2 400 with 128MB of ram and 500MB of swap.
When compiling mysql322-server with the compiler option of '-O2' or
'-O3', the build gets up to sql_yacc.cc. It churns on this file and
goes into the o
On Wed, 7 Jul 1999 Keith Stevenson wrote:
>> Why is rc.conf readable by world?!
>
>
>Why not?
What about that:
spppconfig_isp0="authproto=chap myauthname=foo myauthsecret='top secret'
hisauthname=some-gw hisauthsecret='another secret'"
Boris
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Boris Staeblow
To Unsu
I got this a few days ago. Apparently there was some form of problem
with the vm subsystem (I'm speculating here). What I did to fix it was
to re-cvsup the source tree (after killing non-essential processes) and
rebuilding only the kernel. After compiling and installing the new
kernel, I reboot
>Since we have increased the hard page table allocation for the kernel to
>1G (?) we should be able to safely increase VM_KMEM_SIZE_MAX. I was
>thinking of increasing it to 512MB. This increase only effects
>large-memory systems. It keeps them from locking up :-)
>
>Anyone
:
: Yes, I do - at least with the 512MB figure. That would be half of the 1GB
:KVA space and large systems really need that space for things like network
:buffers and other map regions.
:
:-DG
:
:David Greenman
:Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org
:Creato
>: Yes, I do - at least with the 512MB figure. That would be half of the 1GB
>:KVA space and large systems really need that space for things like network
>:buffers and other map regions.
>:
>:-DG
>:
>:David Greenman
>:Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org
>
:>limit ought to work for a 4G machine
:>
:>Since most of those news files were small, I think Kirk's news test code
:>is pretty much the worse case scenario as far as vnode allocation goes.
:
: Well, I could possibly live with 256MB, but the vnode/fsnode consumption
:seems to be get
David Greenman wrote:
> Yes, I do - at least with the 512MB figure. That would be half of the 1GB
>KVA space and large systems really need that space for things like network
>buffers and other map regions.
Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What would be an acceptable upper limit?
On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 10:02:44PM +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
>
> Ha, and you thought it'd be straight forward ;^P
>
;b just time mate :) I'm off on holiday on Saturday, until the next Sunday.
Day off work on the Monday. If I don't get it tied up before I go I'll finish
it on my return.
Joe
-
On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 01:00:46PM +0100, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
>
> On 07-Jul-99 Ladavac Marino wrote:
>
> sysinstall drops you into ppp and you have to use the term
> command to log in manually.
Ahha, it's not quite as bad as that. sysinstall asks you some questions
and writes a p
Jason Thorpe wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Jul 1999 17:03:16 -0700 (PDT)
> Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > If this could result in a smaller overall structure, it may be worth i
t.
> > To really make the combined structure smaller we would also have to
> > pair-down the
On Thu, 08 Jul 1999 08:36:19 +0800
Peter Wemm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Out of curiosity, how does it handle the problem of small 512 byte
> directories? Does it consume a whole page or does it do something smarter?
> Or does the ubc work apply to read/write only and the filesystem itsel
:The way this is done in the still-in-development branch of NetBSD's
:unified buffer cache is to basically elimiate the old buffer cache
:interface for vnode read/write completely. When you want to do that
:sort of I/O to a vnode, you simply map a window of the object into
:KVA space (via ubc_all
:On Thu, 08 Jul 1999 08:36:19 +0800
: Peter Wemm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:
: > Out of curiosity, how does it handle the problem of small 512 byte
: > directories? Does it consume a whole page or does it do something smarter?
: > Or does the ubc work apply to read/write only and the filesystem
On Thursday, 8 July 1999 at 9:26:09 +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> David Greenman wrote:
>> Yes, I do - at least with the 512MB figure. That would be half of the 1GB
>> KVA space and large systems really need that space for things like network
>> buffers and other map regions.
>
> Matthew Dillon
:Why not put the kernel in a different address space? IIRC there's no
:absolute requirement for the kernel and userland to be in the same
:address space, and that way we would have 4 GB for each.
:
:Greg
No, the syscall overhead is way too high if we have to mess with MMU
context. This
we already use the gs register for SMP now..
what about the fs register?
I vaguely remember that the different segments could be used to achieve
this (%fs points to user space or something)
julian
On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> :Why not put the kernel in a different address sp
uh...
[phaser.whistle.com] 536 man 9 finetimer
No entry for finetimer in section 9 of the manual
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Seigo Tanimura wrote:
> Another idea has come to my mind...
>
>
> pca(4) currently uses acquire_timer0(), which changes the timer
> frequency directly, breaking finetimer(9)
On Wed, 7 Jul 1999 19:06:48 -0700 (PDT),
Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
julian> uh...
julian> [phaser.whistle.com] 536 man 9 finetimer
julian> No entry for finetimer in section 9 of the manual
Sorry, finetimer(9) is the new timer implemented in my latest midi driver.
You can read t
-current kernel as of 1700 PST (or thereabouts):
spec_strategy+0x31: movl0x28(%eax), eax
Note: %eax = 0
Traceback:
--
spec_strategy(c3d27dd0,c3d27dac,c01cbe1,c3d27dd0,c3d27ddc) at spec_strategy+0x31
spec_vnoperate(c
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Seigo Tanimura wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Jul 1999 19:06:48 -0700 (PDT),
> Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> julian> uh...
> julian> [phaser.whistle.com] 536 man 9 finetimer
> julian> No entry for finetimer in section 9 of the manual
>
>
> Sorry, finetimer(9) is the
On Wed, 7 Jul 1999 19:18:57 -0700 (PDT),
Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> Sorry, finetimer(9) is the new timer implemented in my latest midi driver.
>> You can read the short paper describing the feature and principle in:
>>
>> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
julian> how do I read
> Why not put the kernel in a different address space? IIRC there's no
> absolute requirement for the kernel and userland to be in the same
> address space, and that way we would have 4 GB for each.
Wouldn't that make system calls that need to share data between kernel
and user spaces hopeless
> we already use the gs register for SMP now..
> what about the fs register?
> I vaguely remember that the different segments could be used to achieve
> this (%fs points to user space or something)
... as I've suggested a few days ago, and was told to shut up with a (rather
irrelevant) refere
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Seigo Tanimura wrote:
>
> Ow, I thought it was in the mailing list archive, turned out not.
> I will attach the paper below. Sorry for a long mail.
>
>
> --- v --- cut here --- v ---
> Unlike 16550, MPU401 does not generate an interrupt on TX-ready.
> So we have to choose
On Wed, 7 Jul 1999 18:21:03 -0700 (PDT)
Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now, I also believe that when UVM maps those pages, it makes them
> copy-on-write so I/O can be initiated on the data without having to
> stall anyone attempting to make further modifications to
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Patryk Zadarnowski wrote:
>
> > Why not put the kernel in a different address space? IIRC there's no
> > absolute requirement for the kernel and userland to be in the same
> > address space, and that way we would have 4 GB for each.
>
> Wouldn't that make system calls tha
this is my first bout with -current... and i have a question about the
cmd640 workaround code...
upon booting -current (from 7/6/99) i noticed that the kernel didn't report
that the work around was enabled... so i began searching through the code
looking for where the workaround actually was... i
> > > Why is rc.conf readable by world?!
> >
> > Why not?
>
> What reason would the rest of the "world" have to read rc.conf? It could
> only create a possible security risk.
This is shabby reasoning. rc.conf contains public system configuration
data, which may need to be consumed by non-roo
On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
> > > > Why is rc.conf readable by world?!
> > >
> > > Why not?
> >
> > What reason would the rest of the "world" have to read rc.conf? It could
> > only create a possible security risk.
>
> This is shabby reasoning. rc.conf contains public system config
> > > What reason would the rest of the "world" have to read rc.conf? It could
> > > only create a possible security risk.
> >
> > This is shabby reasoning. rc.conf contains public system configuration
> > data, which may need to be consumed by non-root processes.
>
> What kind of non-root pr
Alex Zepeda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Why is rc.conf readable by world?!
> >
> > Why not?
>
> What reason would the rest of the "world" have to read rc.conf? It could
> only create a possible security risk.
Unix systems are typically designed the other way around - don't
read-protect
50 matches
Mail list logo
