Max Khon wrote:
>
> hi, there!
>
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > What about it for 4.0-ST?
> >
> > Index: src/etc/root/dot.cshrc
>
> [trim]
>
> and what's about this?
>
> --- usr.sbin/mergemaster/mergemaster.sh.origTue Jul 11 21:34:20 2000
> +++ usr.sbin/mergemaster/
> Brian Somers wrote:
>
> >> Well, "periodic security" will work as long as /etc/periodic/security
> >> exists, so I guess you just mean the docs need updating? I'll get to
> >> that if someone is actually planning on committing this stuff.
> >=20
> > Perhaps the best option is to do with the in
> > Brian Somers wrote:
> >
> > >> Well, "periodic security" will work as long as /etc/periodic/security
> > >> exists, so I guess you just mean the docs need updating? I'll get to
> > >> that if someone is actually planning on committing this stuff.
> > >=20
> > > Perhaps the best option is to
Brian Somers wrote:
> Oops, sorry for the reply latency
Don't worry, I've been side-tracked by docs stuff, committing things
then thinking "am I allowed to do that?", etc. Fortunately I haven't
been forced to wear the pointy hat yet. :-)
> I don't think it's appropriate to separate the sec
Hi,
There are plenty of PRs languishing without comment in the PR database,
and this is one that requires a "implement and close it" or "here's a
good reason not to do this, and close it" response.
Any takers? Reply-To set to myself.
Neil
--
Neil Blakey-Milner
Sunesi Clinical Systems
[EMAIL P
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 11:01:59PM -0400, Joseph Jacobson wrote:
>
> Local to local talk doesn't work if the hostname for the box doesn't
> match any an ip on any interface. Although this sounds wierd, consider
> a non-dedicated ppp link. Although you can get around this problem with
> 'talk u
On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 04:17:53PM +0200, Frederik Meerwaldt wrote:
> Can anyone tell me a clustering software for FreeBSD?
PolyServe? No URL, as I'm in the air at the moment, but try a general
web search, or look at past announcements on DaemonNews, where it was
mentioned a few weeks back.
N
Hello,
Today and yesterday I tried to build a freshly cvsup-ed RELENG_4 source tree,
both builds failed. Did I forget/miss something, or did someone break the
build?
Rene
(build was started with make buildworld)
===> usr.sbin/lptcontrol
rm -f .depend
mkdep -f .depend -a-I/usr/obj/usr/src/i3
An SMTP stream claimed that Rene de Vries muttered:
> Today and yesterday I tried to build a freshly cvsup-ed RELENG_4 source tree,
> both builds failed. Did I forget/miss something, or did someone break the
> build?
Fixed as of about 9:30am pacific time. re-cvsup.
AlanC
To Unsubscribe: send
On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, Rene de Vries wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Today and yesterday I tried to build a freshly cvsup-ed RELENG_4 source tree,
> both builds failed. Did I forget/miss something, or did someone break the
> build?
>
You seem to have missed a couple dozen messages regarding this problem and
On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, Ben Smithurst wrote:
> Thanks. I took advantage of it to commit a question to the FAQ which
> James (on the cc list) asked recently: "what is a repo-copy?", let
> me know if it answers your question well enough. (it's in the misc
> questions bit.)
This is very nice. I unde
> There are plenty of PRs languishing without comment in the PR database,
> and this is one that requires a "implement and close it" or "here's a
> good reason not to do this, and close it" response.
Well, I'm not real thrilled with this particular patch. It adds no
functionality to ifconfig, ye
i was using pty-redir (from netbsd) and ssh to do VPN (ppp over ssh).
we prefer to use kernel mode ppp for religious reasons.
(userland ppp and netgraph ppp are not options).
under 3.x release, with the ports/ssh, this worked fine.
however, starting with when openssh became part of the system,
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >
> > somewhere in the top of . I want to verify if this is indeed
> > the best way to solve it ?
>
> No, the proper solution is to do a forward struct declaration like so:
>
> struct something;
>
> struct bigger_something {
> struct something foo;
> }
As we
* Wilbert de Graaf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000713 15:59] wrote:
>
> Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> > >
> > > somewhere in the top of . I want to verify if this is indeed
> > > the best way to solve it ?
> >
> > No, the proper solution is to do a forward struct declaration like so:
> >
> > struct som
Hi Alfred,
> you might as well unconditionally include sys/socket.h and let it's
> internal #ifndef take care of that problem.
you're right and i'll change it
> I'm not sure why you don't just make your own new header file for
> this struct unless you're adding to an existing structure in
> so
Jim Mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>i was using pty-redir (from netbsd) and ssh to do VPN (ppp over ssh).
>under 3.x release, with the ports/ssh, this worked fine.
>however, starting with when openssh became part of the system, it stopped
>working.
>when i did a "pty-redir ssh remhost /usr/sb
* Wilbert de Graaf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000713 17:11] wrote:
>
> Hi Alfred,
>
> > you might as well unconditionally include sys/socket.h and let it's
> > internal #ifndef take care of that problem.
>
> you're right and i'll change it
>
> > I'm not sure why you don't just make your own new head
Where/How does one implement a hardware interrupt handler? I haven't done this
sort of thing since the days of DOS. I imagine its a lot different in *nix. :)
-Brandon
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Lead, follow, or get run over"
"In life there are those who steer, and those who push"
"I'm not impatient,
On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 01:35:25AM +0100, Tony Finch wrote:
> Hmm, I was confused for a while there by your reversed patch, but I know
> where we are now :-)
yeah, sorry, i should have verified i got the polarity right.
> I had a similar problem with user-ppp over ssh talking to an sshd on
> Ope
...there are so many excessively bright and experienced minds on this list
I can't imagine a _better_ place to ask it. My ISP (for whom I consult
from time to time) is looking into Layer 4 Gigabit Ethernet; he needs
some idea of the quality of various switches out there. If anyone here
has recom
So it's coming up on that IETF time of year again, this time in beautiful
(?) down-town Pittsburgh, in the first week of August.
First, I'd like to encourage FreeBSD people to turn out for the event, as
a strong showing in the standards community is great, and keeps the
research projects coming
[ cc'ing to -hackers because some content may be relavent outside -doc ]
Hello all,
Is there a chapter of the Handbook that details how to use the "fixit" floppy?
I moved a disk from controller to controller yesterday and in doing so rendered
my system unbootable (ad4 went to ad0, fstab is hose
>
> So it's coming up on that IETF time of year again, this time in beautiful
> (?) down-town Pittsburgh, in the first week of August.
ENOMONEY, ENOTIME, but for whoever goes, can you check out any of the SCSI
over IP stuff and report back? I'm immensely interested, but have time/budget
to go my
On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 10:55:05PM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
> ... an idea would be to add some limit to limit the number of processes
> forked by a process (at one time in addition to the number of processes
> by user which may be relative to the system wide limit
> (maxprocperproc=nproc-10).
On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 09:19:24PM -0700, Frank Mayhar wrote:
> ...there are so many excessively bright and experienced minds on this list
> I can't imagine a _better_ place to ask it. My ISP (for whom I consult
> from time to time) is looking into Layer 4 Gigabit Ethernet; he needs
> some idea o
26 matches
Mail list logo
