On Sat, 31 May 2003, [ISO-8859-1] Mikko Työläjärvi wrote:
> The only way (except "for historical reasons") the above standards
> excerpts would make sense to me, is if setting the SIGCHLD handler to
> SIG_IGN always makes the system reap child processes,
OpenBSD does this, I believe.
> But I've
Just curious,
anyone know what the "proper" behavior for wait() is when SIGCHLD
is ignored? Is it simply undefined? Don't see anything mentioned
in the wait(2) manpage one way or tother, and other OSes don't seem
to agree much.
-Paul.
bash$ cat wait.c
#include
#include
#include
#include
#i
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Herma
> n writes:
>
> > arc4random() returns random numbers in the range of 0 to
> > (2**32)-1, and therefore has twice the range of RAND_MAX.
>
> Good.
>
> > EXAMPLES
> > The following produces a drop-in repla
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 06:22:37PM -0800, Paul Herman wrote:
> >
> > [...range of arc4random() is twice that of random()...]
>
> I see this as a major advantage of arc4random()
I see this as an advantage, too. It's also prod
On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Anthony Schneider wrote:
> an issue of arc4random return u_int32_t and rand*
> returning int (ie unsigned vs signed)?
Nope, casting arc4random() to int or casting random() to unsigned
int won't solve the problem. The problem still is that
arc4random()'s range is twice that o
Hi,
...a potential quick commit for someone. :-)
What's the concesus that arc4random() should be a drop-in
replacement for rand()/random()? Consider the following that
caclulates the average of a bunch of random numbers on [0.0, 1.0]:
bash$ cat rand.c
#include
int i;
double avg;
#d
On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Geoffrey C. Speicher wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Paul Herman wrote:
>
> > I think the best thing to do is file a PR for this.
>
> With or without a patch?
If you have a fix, patches go under the "Fix:" section. Most
importantly, please fill in
On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Geoffrey C. Speicher wrote:
> So we either need to have a compelling solution or get a
> committer to step in and make up our minds for us.
I think the best thing to do is file a PR for this.
-Paul.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> I don't claim this is perfect for every case; I'm just taking aim
> at the common case, where it's currently far too easy to
> accidentally screw yourself in the foot.
...and have the screw (or bullet) delivered as precisely, quickly
and efficientl
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> I'm talking about down around line 177 thru (unpatched), where it's
> copying back to the primary file.
> [...]
> which is Very Bad (tm) in that it's not very resilient against
> system crashes. The rename() solution is much safer.
Ah, now I see,
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2002 at 11:32:54AM -0700 I heard the voice of
> Paul Herman, and lo! it spake thus:
> >
> > In fact, if you look at fileupdate(), you see that it already gains
> > an exclusive lock on the temp file, but no
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2002 at 09:59:10AM -0700 I heard the voice of
> Paul Herman, and lo! it spake thus:
> >
> > I can't imagine it would be too extensive of a rewrite. The temp
> > file code could be kept, and in file
[ pulled over to -hackers as well ]
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2002 at 09:00:52AM -0700 I heard the voice of
> Paul Herman, and lo! it spake thus:
> > On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Geoffrey C. Speicher wrote:
> >
> > How so? I'm not
On Sat, 18 May 2002, Geoffrey C. Speicher wrote:
> > > The file isn't actually unlinked until p1 closes the fd
> >
>
> Hmm. Rechecking the man page for unlink(2) I see that I worded
> the above incorrectly. The file is unlinked when you unlink(),
> but not actually removed until close().
Well,
Howdy Hackers,
I have a DVD-RAM:
cd0 at sym0 bus 0 target 4 lun 0
cd0: Removable CD-ROM SCSI-4 device
cd0: 10.000MB/s transfers (10.000MHz, offset 16)
dd(1), newfs(8), mount(8) et. al. work just great on it, except
for newfs_msdos(8):
bash-2.05# newfs_msdos /dev/cd0c
/dev/cd0c: 2232334 s
Not sure if -arch is a better list for this. If so, followups there.
The units for sbsize in limits is currently displayed in bytes, not
kilobytes. Changing the output to kb to be consistent with the others
(datasize, stacksize, memoryuse, etc.) shouldn't be a problem...
The problem would be w
On Sat, 31 Mar 2001, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bill Moran writes:
> : I'm a little confused here, if access() is such a serious security
> : problem that it should _never_ be used, do we now have a major problem
> : with a large amount of software in the base system?
>
>
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Murray Stokely wrote:
> The NetBSD guys have STLport in 'pkgsrc' to facilitate the
> progress they've made with OpenOffice. I haven't looked at the
> changes they made but as soon as I get NetBSD on that U1 I'll take
> a look at it.
Open Source Tripwire is now ported to F
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Matt Dillon wrote:
> :We have 'vmstat 5' available at http://zoo.ee.ntu.edu.tw/~keichii/
> :Fresh hot vmstat 1 log at
> :http://zoo.ee.ntu.edu.tw/~keichii/vmstat_1.log
>
> I usually don't increase 'maxusers' above 256 myself, but
> 512 should be fine. Everything else
Hi Matt,
[...great comments on the VM writeup from the handbook...]
On Thu, 8 Mar 2001, Matt Dillon wrote:
> This type of load is visible by noting the amount of page scanning
> the system does (the 'sr' field in vmstat) and the number of reactivations
> (the 're' field in vmstat).
On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, milunovic wrote:
> Does anybody have blow fish for FreeBSD or know wehere to find it?
> I just want to change password encription from MD5 to blow fish:o)
I think Mark Murray is still sitting on the patch I did for this very
thing. Check the -hackers mail archives. It was a
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> I received the patch to add counter for fork() set from Paul. I've
> tested it on my -CURRENT and -STABLE boxes, and it seems fine for me.
> So, I post his patch for review.
I do have a change (I knew I forgot something.)
This is exactly the same pa
On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Dan Nelson wrote:
> I think that's expected behaviour. Fifos should be usable on NFS
> mounts, but an active fifo is only usable for processes running on
> the same machine.
That's cool, seems reasonable.
BTW, the hanging behavior I was seeing didn't have anything to do wit
Hi,
My take on the nfs code (in nfs_open) is that an open() on a FIFO
should return an EACCES. I have no problems with that. But when I
NFS Server: mkfifo foo; cat < foo
NFS Client: echo "hello world" > foo
(over an NFS mount point) the shell hangs on the client trying to open
"foo" in
Hi,
I've come up with a small patchset to libcrypt (ported from OpenBSD)
which adds the blowfish password digest in addition to des and md5.
Features include:
* Compatibility with OpenBSD (for those of us using NIS)
* switchable behavior in /etc/login.conf (passwd_format=bf)
* ability to
After some thought about init(8) and securelevel (and a suggestion
from Sheldon Hearn) I believe a good compromise is to have the whole
"init(8) being able to lower the securelevel in single-user mode"
behaviour a boot variable in /boot/loader.conf.
This has the advantage of giving people who wi
Hi,
[ Bcc'ed to -current ]
Perhaps it was a mistake :) but I took up someone else's cause and
started a thread on -current which now probably belongs on -hackers.
So:
What are the dangers of having init lower the securelevel to 0 when
the system goes into single user? Looking at the mailing
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Person, Roderick wrote:
> I upgraded from 4.0 to 4.1 and when I reboot my old I get the error this
> error...
> mount: /dev/ad0s1a on / : specified device does not match mounted
> device. mounting /etc/fstab filesystems failed, startup aborted.
>
> when I type mount it
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> There are many ways to get random bits, this was just meant as an
> example that it doesn't have to be hard or even difficult to use
> FreeBSD for "special tasks".
>
> I'm pretty sure that "noise-diodes" are probably the most efficient
> way to gen
Hi,
I've been meaning to ask this ever since I started using 2.2.2
years ago: Why are these two sysctl variables mixed up?
bash-2.03$ sysctl kern.osrevision kern.osreldate
kern.osrevision: 199506
kern.osreldate: 41
Is this really an oversight that's existed for more than 3 years?
If this
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Well, IMHO I think something like this implemented in the kernel for
> the reasons given above would let people write bad code.
Yup, that clinches it for me. You're right. This would have fallen
more into the catagory of "bad program design fix" rathe
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2000, Paul Herman wrote:
> > Perhaps a discussion of something like FORK_RATELIMIT along the lines
> > of ICMP_BANDLIM is in order?
>
> why would you do that? If something wants to fork, let it fork. When
>
On 10 xxx -1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Some days ago my friend tell me that with simple user rights
> and whit only 1 line of code he could crash my machine. I laught
> but he did it :(.
>
> What he wrote was ' int main(void) {while(1) fork(); }' compiled it
> and run it. Within a second /kern
On Sat, 1 Jul 2000, I wrote:
> vmmeter->cnt.v_reactivated counts the number of cache pages that get
> promoted to either active or inactive queues. My read (and I could be
> wrong) from vm/vm_page.c is, there is no statistic to count the
> inactive pages that get "reclaimed" into the active queu
Hi,
vmmeter->cnt.v_reactivated counts the number of cache pages that get
promoted to either active or inactive queues. My read (and I could be
wrong) from vm/vm_page.c is, there is no statistic to count the
inactive pages that get "reclaimed" into the active queue. I would
think this would be i
35 matches
Mail list logo
