Re: Patch to remove MFREE() macro entirely

2002-02-02 Thread David Greenman
>Oh what a tangled web we weave. This should be really easy for people >to take a quick look at to see if I made any mistakes. I'm basically >untangling the (small) mess that people made of the code while trying to >use the MFREE() macro over the last N years. > >If nobody se

Re: fork rate limit

2002-02-02 Thread Mike Makonnen
On Sun, 3 Feb 2002 02:35:46 +0400 Gaspar Chilingarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've got such situation on our free shellbox set up in the > university - some newbies were kidding with old while(1) fork(); > attack. Finnaly they got hit by memory limits

Patch to remove MFREE() macro entirely

2002-02-02 Thread Matthew Dillon
Oh what a tangled web we weave. This should be really easy for people to take a quick look at to see if I made any mistakes. I'm basically untangling the (small) mess that people made of the code while trying to use the MFREE() macro over the last N years. If nobody sees any

Re: problem w/ dlopen(); bug or feature?

2002-02-02 Thread Terry Lambert
Bjoern Fischer wrote: > > Yes, it's possible to find out which shared object the dlopen call > > was made from. There's already a function obj_from_addr() in rtld.c > > which does that. But as far as I know, it is not standard behavior to > > search the RPATH of the object which issued the dlope

Re: fork rate limit

2002-02-02 Thread Gaspar Chilingarov
-> Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 12:52:24 -0800 (PST) -> From: Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -> To: Gaspar Chilingarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> Subject: Re: fork rate limit -> -> :Hi! -> : -> :Is it reasonable to administratively limit users' ability to call fork -> :too other

Re: fork rate limit

2002-02-02 Thread Matthew Dillon
:Hi! : :Is it reasonable to administratively limit users' ability to call fork :too other ? Users can take away too much CPU time even if you have :limited them by login.conf 'cputime' limit - just forking lightweight :processes too often. : :If it seems good thing to do, i'll try to code it and s

fork rate limit

2002-02-02 Thread Gaspar Chilingarov
Hi! Is it reasonable to administratively limit users' ability to call fork too other ? Users can take away too much CPU time even if you have limited them by login.conf 'cputime' limit - just forking lightweight processes too often. If it seems good thing to do, i'll try to code it and submit pa

USB CDRW

2002-02-02 Thread Matthew
Is FreeBSD support CD-rewriting for an external USB CDRW? -- WWW.XGFORCE.COM - The Next Generation System Clustering and Enterprise Firewall/VPN Solutions. -- To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROT

Re: buildworld via ro mounted /usr/src

2002-02-02 Thread Simon 'corecode' Schubert
On Fri, 1 Feb 2002 15:03:32 -0800 "Crist J. Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The build procedure should be done as usual -- > > # make (env variables if not given in /etc/make.conf) -j4 buildworld > > # make KERNCONF=FreeBEER KERNCONFDIR=/usr/local/etc/conf -j4 > > buildkernel# make KERNCONF

natd UDP errors with PPP demand dial

2002-02-02 Thread Marko
Hello, My question is concerning the popular "netd[pid] failed to write packet back [Permission denied]" message. The machine is FreeBSD 4.3R. It connects to the Internet through a PPP demand dial link. Natd is in dynamic mode. The rules seem to be ok, and packet filtering is workin

Re: problem w/ dlopen(); bug or feature?

2002-02-02 Thread Bjoern Fischer
Hello John, > Yes, it's possible to find out which shared object the dlopen call > was made from. There's already a function obj_from_addr() in rtld.c > which does that. But as far as I know, it is not standard behavior to > search the RPATH of the object which issued the dlopen call. I only h