Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
Can you provide me datasheet and technical reference material to what
"ATA Security" is? Which ATA specification is this documented in? I'd
like to read it.
I think you can found it in ATA-ATAPI-7 vol.1: "4.7 Security Mode feature set".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adv
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
You naturally have to keep pf.conf.ssh-* in sync if you have multiple
machines. You can use pfsync(4) to accomplish this task (I think), or
you can do it the obvious way (make a central distribution box that
scp/rsync's the files out and runs "/etc/rc.d/pf reload").
pfs
On Monday 29 September 2008, Rich Healey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent a
missive stating:
> Recently I'm getting a lot of brute force attempts on my server, in the
> past I've used various tips and tricks with linux boxes but many of them
> were fairly linux specific.
>
> What do you BSD guys use for
Rich Healey said the following on 9/29/08 8:10 PM:
> Recently I'm getting a lot of brute force attempts on my server, in the
> past I've used various tips and tricks with linux boxes but many of them
> were fairly linux specific.
>
> What do you BSD guys use for this purpose?
>
> If this belongs on
Rich Healey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Recently I'm getting a lot of brute force attempts on my server, in the
> past I've used various tips and tricks with linux boxes but many of them
> were fairly linux specific.
>
> What do you BSD guys
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 10:10:59AM +1000, Rich Healey wrote:
> Recently I'm getting a lot of brute force attempts on my server, in the
> past I've used various tips and tricks with linux boxes but many of them
> were fairly linux specific.
>
> What do you BSD guys use for this purpose?
This proba
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Recently I'm getting a lot of brute force attempts on my server, in the
past I've used various tips and tricks with linux boxes but many of them
were fairly linux specific.
What do you BSD guys use for this purpose?
If this belongs on -security let m
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 01:06:55AM +0200, Daniel Roethlisberger wrote:
> I've added experimental support for the ATA Security command set to
> atacontrol. Please test and review. If you have some spare disk(s)
> with ATA Security support and a BIOS which does not freeze the security
> configurati
I've added experimental support for the ATA Security command set to
atacontrol. Please test and review. If you have some spare disk(s)
with ATA Security support and a BIOS which does not freeze the security
configuration, I'd like to hear about any results of playing with this
patch. See the cha
On Friday 26 September 2008 07:15:48 pm Murty, Ravi wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was wondering what all these different priority related fields in a
> thread structure meant. This is the 8.0 kernel tree.
>
> Td_base_pri
What the thread's priority should be while it is in the kernel. Doing a
*sleep(..
Again I would like to extend my thanks to everyone who helped with this
problem, and a special thank you Jeremy and Bruce for trying to sus out where
the fault might be.
Your input and support is deeply appreciated.
Peg
> -Original Message-
> From: Dag-Erling Smørgrav [mailto:[EMAIL
Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'll take care of it.
kib beat me to it...
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubs
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 04:19:43PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Jeremy Chadwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I see the system has an Intel AHCI-based controller (probably an ICH10
> > chip, since the ICH10 is the first to support 6 SATA channels).
>
> No. I have an ICH8 with six channel
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Andrey V. Elsukov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Hi, Poul-Henning, I think it should be MFCed before release.
> I agree, but I'm ENOTIME.
I'll take care of it.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jeremy Chadwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I see the system has an Intel AHCI-based controller (probably an ICH10
> chip, since the ICH10 is the first to support 6 SATA channels).
No. I have an ICH8 with six channels, of which five are in use.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
Hello @all,
hello Oliver,
thnak you for your reply.
No i do not try to solve a real problem.
It was hypothetically, an idea, not more not less.
I have this written in my first posting.
And for me, it is a logical dependency that the ram get paged to the swap if
there is not enough
RAM for all pr
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:36:46 +0200
"Michael Schuh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> so we have a webserver (par example) at this mirror it has very good
> speed for the file-access
> (ok i know in allmost cases is not the disk the bottleneck, and if we
> could doing caching...)
> at the above examle it
Michael Schuh wrote:
> Clearly the Writeprocess of writeing data to an mirror is totally ended, as
> all mirrordevices are written.
> But for the read the kernel uses the faster device..and there it could
> be an advantage.i m thinking.
> And yes i think it could be an advantage, if th
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008, Oliver Fromme wrote:
Danny Braniss wrote:
> Grr, there goes binary search theory out of the window,
> So far I have managed to pinpoint the day that the changes affect the
> throughput:
> 18/08/08 00:00:00 19/08/08 00:00:00
> (I assume cvs's date is GMT).
> now
Danny Braniss wrote:
> Grr, there goes binary search theory out of the window,
> So far I have managed to pinpoint the day that the changes affect the
> throughput:
> 18/08/08 00:00:00 19/08/08 00:00:00
> (I assume cvs's date is GMT).
> now would be a good time for some help, s
Hi,
thank you for your answer.
Clearly the Writeprocess of writeing data to an mirror is totally ended, as
all mirrordevices are written.
But for the read the kernel uses the faster device..and there it could
be an advantage.i m thinking.
And yes i think it could be an advantage, if the R
> it more difficult than I expected.
> for one, the kernel date was missleading, the actual source update is the
> key, so
> the window of changes is now 28/July to 19/August. I have the diffs, but
> nothing
> yet seems relevant.
>
> on the other hand, I tried NFS/TCP, and there things seem ok, i
I dont know if it going to be of any use, but in the past, I have used a free
but very low level partition editing tool called Ranish
http://www.ranish.com/part/
It does allow for moving of any partitions (or slices in BSD terms)
Watch out though, as there is no real checks done against command
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Andrey V. Elsukov" writes:
>This is known problem and it fixed in CURRENT.
>You need to apply this patch:
>http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sbin/atacontrol/atacontrol.c.diff?r1=1.47;r2=1.48
>
>I cc'ed person, who commited this fix.
>Hi, Poul-Henning, I thi
> > it more difficult than I expected.
> > for one, the kernel date was missleading, the actual source update is the
> > key, so
> > the window of changes is now 28/July to 19/August. I have the diffs, but
> > nothing
> > yet seems relevant.
> >
> > on the other hand, I tried NFS/TCP, and there t
> > On Fri, 26 Sep 2008, Danny Braniss wrote:
> >
> > > after more testing, it seems it's related to changes made between Aug 4
> > > and
> > > Aug 29 ie, a kernel built on Aug 4 works fine, Aug 29 is slow. I'l now
> > > try
> > > and close the gap.
> >
> > I think this is the best way forwar
Mike Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What file on FreeBSD acts like autoexec.bat?
> Also please leave the full path%
The file that probably comes closest is /etc/rc.local
(you have to create it, it doesn't exist by default).
Actually FreeBSD's rc system allows much more flexible
scripting ..
27 matches
Mail list logo
