I have recieved your message dated Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:16:26 + (zulu).
I have scanned the message for spam addresses which will be blocked from future access.
Now listen here. Your e-mail appears to amount to nothing more than a worthless spam.
You have 36 hours to explain yourself to my sat
[RESPONSE:]
->Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by
-> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on Monday, April 22, 2002 at 06:24:46
->---
->
->: http://%61l%6Cy%6Fu%63%61%6E%76%69%65%77%62%75%66%66%65%74%2E%68%79%70%65
On Wednesday 24 April 2002 01:14, you wrote:
> On Tuesday, 23 April 2002 at 12:06:01 +0200, Jochem Kossen wrote:
> > On Tuesday 23 April 2002 11:04, you wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> I've been noticing a continuing trend for more and more "safe"
> configurations the default. I spent half a day
"Matthew N. Dodd" wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > It really pissed me off when the AHA-1742 support dropped out when CAM
> > came in, but that, at least, was understandable, since it was a trade:
> > something deisrable for something less desirable to the majority of
> > use
Robert Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> > > A more conservative default configuration results in a material
> > > improvement in system security.
> >
> > *snip*
>
> By snipping here, you removed reference to the fact that this was a
> general discussion of directi
Robert Watson wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > The reality is that reducing exposure is an important part of any security
> > > posture.
> >
> > This is an argument for security through obscurity.
> >
> > If we are talking risk reduction, then we can easily achieve it
> > s
Hi,
I hate to jump into this fray, but if this is going to be a public
thread, will
everybody make the reply to the list??? :-) So far I only see Terry's
emails.
Thanks!
Andy
Terry Lambert wrote:
>Robert Watson wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
>>
The reality is t
Robert Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> > I think the issue is POLA. Sure, we can put in individual knobs to
> > twiddle, but who will do that? I thought that securelevel would have
> > been a suitable solution to say "I want approximately *this* much
> > securit
David Schultz wrote:
> Aah...we'd better put uucp back in the base system, then. Never mind
> that it might have security problems that we don't know about. :P
I can guarantee you that having a computer booted has security
problems that we don't know about, so the logical thing to do,
from that
Hey can whoever did the repo copy in the Misc/kde3 stuff blease
shoot it?
You have just increased the size of the repo tree by 130MB
I know that it's normally bad to back out a repo copy
but THIS IS RIDCULOUS!
I'm here in Australia on the end of a 28.8 (at best) modem link
I was wondering why
Thus spake Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> David Schultz wrote:
> > Aah...we'd better put uucp back in the base system, then. Never mind
> > that it might have security problems that we don't know about. :P
>
> I can guarantee you that having a computer booted has security
> problems that
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 09:06:55AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> I think the issue here is that individuals make this kind of decision.
> We need a broader consensus for this kind of change. As Jochem points
> out, only 3 people were involved in the decision, all of them people
> with secur
Kenneth Culver writes:
> OK, I THINK I found what calls the actual kernel syscall handler, and
> sets it's args first, but I'm not sure:
>
> from linux_locore.s
>
> NON_GPROF_ENTRY(linux_sigcode)
<...>
> Does anyone who actually knows assembly have any ideas?
This is the linux sigtramp
Hi hackers,
After gainning some knowledge of UI coding when doing thefish, I've
thought of making a graphical tool for vinum. I've just installed
5.0-DP1 on my main box and took the opportunity to use vinum for the
first time, and I must say, after having worked with Veritas VM, that I
*love* it.
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 03:52:18PM +0200, Miguel Mendez wrote:
> Hi hackers,
>
> After gainning some knowledge of UI coding when doing thefish, I've
> thought of making a graphical tool for vinum. I've just installed
> 5.0-DP1 on my main box and took the opportunity to use vinum for the
> first t
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 03:48:36AM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
>
> Hey can whoever did the repo copy in the Misc/kde3 stuff blease
> shoot it?
>
> You have just increased the size of the repo tree by 130MB
> I know that it's normally bad to back out a repo copy
> but THIS IS RIDCULOUS!
>
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 12:05:29AM +1000, Joshua Goodall wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 03:52:18PM +0200, Miguel Mendez wrote:
> However you present the UI, when it comes to making changes, please
> have it queue up the actual commands which are then visible to the
> sysadmin for approval, backo
>On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 03:52:18PM +0200, Miguel Mendez wrote:
>> Hi hackers,
>>
>> After gainning some knowledge of UI coding when doing thefish, I've
>> thought of making a graphical tool for vinum. I've just installed
>> 5.0-DP1 on my main box and took the opportunity to use vinum for the
>>
On 24-Apr-2002 Matthew Jacob wrote:
>
> This is a recent i386 SMP kernel:
>
>
> panic: mutex isp not owned at ../../../kern/kern_synch.c:449
> cpuid = 0; lapic.id =
> Debugger("panic")
> Stopped at Debugger+0x41: xorl%eax,%eax
> db>
> db> t
> Debugger(c031189a) at Debugger+0
Hi,
Some time ago you were looking for a name for "the Fish".
Since your work now is including VINUM, perhaps a name
would be better "xsysconfig" or "xsysadm"
Since the Vinum stuff follows a similar paradyme as I had
to solve with my cluster failover stuff. You might want to
look at my UI.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Miguel Mendez writes:
>Well, if you've used recent versions of the veritas volume manager
>fronted you'll notice that they give the cli command output in a window,
>that's what I intend to do.
They did that in 1994...
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilo
I have a few questions on the kernel memory allocation
available in the FreeBSD kernel and also on the
process of adding new system calls.
I working on adding an audit subsystem to the kernel
to support C2 auditing.
I have two questions:
1. What is the correct (
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 04:16:00PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Hi,
> You might want to generalize things a bit and make a graphical GUI
> for GEOM instead. Eventually vinum will either be absorbed into
> GEOM as one class or (better) be implemented with a set of simple
> classes in GEOM.
E
Le Mercredi 24 avril 2002, à 11:12 , Mike Meyer a écrit :
> [Replies have been pointed to -hackers to get this off of -stable.]
[taken to libh]
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, The Anarcat
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
>> On Wed Apr 24, 2002 at 12:17:37AM -0500, Mike Meyer wrote:
>>> In <[EMAIL PROTE
In message: <00aa01c1e9d8$b3c1b9f0$ef01a8c0@davidwnt>
"David Xu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: Current branch, pci_bus.c has wrong PNP ID comment.
Committed. Thanks.
Usually, however, it is better to file a PR and send that PR number to
hackers for trivial changes like this.
Warner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> 1. What is the correct (standard) way to add a new
>system call to the kernel so it will be
>compatible with 4.* and 5.* ?
You can't use the same code unmodified. %.x requires locking
that is implicit in 4.x.
System calls are
Maybe it's time for new manpage (surprises, changes, etc.?) describing
just differences from some old defaults, changes in behavior etc. Probably
this manpage just gives short descriptions what may historical behavior is
changed.
UPDATING file and tuning(7) man page by Matthew Dillon which serv
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 04:14:44PM +0200, Miguel Mendez wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 12:05:29AM +1000, Joshua Goodall wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 03:52:18PM +0200, Miguel Mendez wrote:
> > However you present the UI, when it comes to making changes, please
> > have it queue up the actua
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 24-Apr-2002 Matthew Jacob wrote:
> >
> > This is a recent i386 SMP kernel:
> >
> >
> > panic: mutex isp not owned at ../../../kern/kern_synch.c:449
> > cpuid = 0; lapic.id =
> > Debugger("panic")
> > Stopped at Debugger+0x41: xo
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Antoine Beaupre
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> Le Mercredi 24 avril 2002, à 11:12 , Mike Meyer a écrit :
> > [Replies have been pointed to -hackers to get this off of -stable.]
> [taken to libh]
Better.
> > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, The Anarcat
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Miguel Mendez wrote:
>So far people have liked The Fish (much more than I have initially hoped
>btw). I think having a nice interface for vinum would be nice.
This sounds like a great idea to me. Both thefish and any future vinum
configuration tools sound like things that w
On Wed, 2002-04-24 at 10:41, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> Maybe the argument isn't where you expect it to be, but is there.
> Can you make a test program which calls mmap2 with its 6th arg as
> something unique like 0xdeadbeef? Then print out (in hex :) the trapframe
> from the linux prepsyscall rout
Brandon S Allbery KF8NH writes:
> On Wed, 2002-04-24 at 10:41, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> > Maybe the argument isn't where you expect it to be, but is there.
> > Can you make a test program which calls mmap2 with its 6th arg as
> > something unique like 0xdeadbeef? Then print out (in hex :) th
[Replies have been pointed to -hackers to get this off of -stable.]
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, The Anarcat
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> On Wed Apr 24, 2002 at 12:17:37AM -0500, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, The Anarcat
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> > > On Tue Apr 23, 2002 at 11:07:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 05:26:22PM +0200, Miguel Mendez wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 04:16:00PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > You might want to generalize things a bit and make a graphical GUI
> > for GEOM instead. Eventually vinum will either be absorbed into
> > GEOM as on
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> Excellent idea Poul, I'm currently gathering info on GEOM and I think
>> that's the way to go.
>
>Does GEOM provide a better interface than DIOCGDINFO and DIOCGSLICEINFO?
>I recently wrote a program to list all the slices and partitions
I'm trying to debug a deadlock problem I'm seeing in a kernel module, and
I wonder if someone could answer some questions I had about spinlocks.
We've got a model where we have interrupt threads hand off work entries
to kthreads (so that the interrupt threads aren't blocked for too long).
The int
* Rob Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020424 10:03] wrote:
> I'm trying to debug a deadlock problem I'm seeing in a kernel module, and
> I wonder if someone could answer some questions I had about spinlocks.
You shouldn't be using spinlocks.
-Alfred
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 24-Apr-2002 Matthew Jacob wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, John Baldwin wrote:
>
>>
>> On 24-Apr-2002 Matthew Jacob wrote:
>> >
>> > This is a recent i386 SMP kernel:
>> >
>> >
>> > panic: mutex isp not owned at ../../../kern/kern_synch.c:449
>> > cpuid = 0; lapic.id =
>> > De
On 24-Apr-2002 Rob Anderson wrote:
> I'm trying to debug a deadlock problem I'm seeing in a kernel module, and
> I wonder if someone could answer some questions I had about spinlocks.
>
> We've got a model where we have interrupt threads hand off work entries
> to kthreads (so that the interrupt
>
> Me, too. The next time this happens, try dumping the contents of the
> mutex structure from ddb. The first argument to mtx_assert() and 2nd arg
> to msleep() is a pointer to the mutex, so you have the address. (The
> pointer looks right since the name was right in the panic message at
> le
On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 01:38:33PM -0700, Gregory Neil Shapiro wrote:
> wkb> Apr 22 09:29:50 freebie sendmail[253]: File descriptors missing on startup:
>stdout, stderr; Bad file descriptor
>
> sendmail always checks it's first three fd's at startup to avoid the
> problem that has just come to l
I tried printing out everything in the trapframe in hex and nothing looke
remotely right.
Ken
On 24 Apr 2002, Brandon S Allbery KF8NH wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-04-24 at 10:41, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> > Maybe the argument isn't where you expect it to be, but is there.
> > Can you make a test progra
>
> Brandon S Allbery KF8NH writes:
> > On Wed, 2002-04-24 at 10:41, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> > > Maybe the argument isn't where you expect it to be, but is there.
> > > Can you make a test program which calls mmap2 with its 6th arg as
> > > something unique like 0xdeadbeef? Then print out (i
On 24-Apr-2002 Kenneth Culver wrote:
>>
>> Brandon S Allbery KF8NH writes:
>> > On Wed, 2002-04-24 at 10:41, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>> > > Maybe the argument isn't where you expect it to be, but is there.
>> > > Can you make a test program which calls mmap2 with its 6th arg as
>> > > somethin
> libc sets it before it enters the kernel. Then on kernel entry we save
> ebp in the trapframe.
So in the case of linux emulation, the glibc that we're using in the
linux-ulator isn't setting it properly? I'm using the linux_base-7 port
for this, so as far as I can tell, it should work... assum
On 24-Apr-2002 Kenneth Culver wrote:
>> libc sets it before it enters the kernel. Then on kernel entry we save
>> ebp in the trapframe.
>
> So in the case of linux emulation, the glibc that we're using in the
> linux-ulator isn't setting it properly? I'm using the linux_base-7 port
> for this,
Title: Untitled Document
En
partenariat avec
Le
dernier sondage avant le second tour des élections présidentielles
On 2002-04-23 21:38, Robert Watson wrote:
> I'm more interested in the general issue here, since you made the general
> assertion that there was a problem that stretched beyond this one issue.
> I'm happy to entertain the idea that we discuss this specific issue in
> more detail. In particular, t
Title: Untitled Document
En
partenariat avec
Le
dernier sondage avant le second tour des élections présidentielles
Antoine Beaupre wrote:
> Le Mercredi 24 avril 2002, à 11:12 , Mike Meyer a écrit :
> > Your simple shell script has to prompt for floppies. That needs UI
> > code. The people who know have decided that the current UI code isn't
> > up to snuff. Hence libh.
>
> Come on.. The current package system
> > libc sets it before it enters the kernel. Then on kernel entry we save
> > ebp in the trapframe.
>
> So in the case of linux emulation, the glibc that we're using in the
> linux-ulator isn't setting it properly? I'm using the linux_base-7 port
> for this, so as far as I can tell, it should wo
> > > libc sets it before it enters the kernel. Then on kernel entry we save
> > > ebp in the trapframe.
> >
> > So in the case of linux emulation, the glibc that we're using in the
> > linux-ulator isn't setting it properly? I'm using the linux_base-7 port
> > for this, so as far as I can tell,
> I'm actually still not seeing a match between what's in truss, and what's
> in my printed-out args, but it seems to be working anyway...
>
Argh, it's not working again... It was working on an install of ms office,
but it won't work on some old windows game.. (winex) and it's still not
setting t
On Wednesday, 24 April 2002 at 12:06:39 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 04:14:44PM +0200, Miguel Mendez wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 12:05:29AM +1000, Joshua Goodall wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 03:52:18PM +0200, Miguel Mendez wrote:
>>> However you present the
Kenneth Culver wrote:
> > I'm actually still not seeing a match between what's in truss, and what's
> > in my printed-out args, but it seems to be working anyway...
> >
> Argh, it's not working again... It was working on an install of ms office,
> but it won't work on some old windows game.. (win
> Here's where it happens:
> sys/i386/linux/linux_sysvec.c
>
> static void
> linux_prepsyscall(struct trapframe *tf, int *args, u_int *code, caddr_t *params)
> {
> args[0] = tf->tf_ebx;
> args[1] = tf->tf_ecx;
> args[2] = tf->tf_edx;
> args[3] = tf->tf_esi;
>
> RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/i386/linux/linux_sysvec.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.99
> diff -u -2 -r1.99 linux_sysvec.c
> --- linux_sysvec.c 4 Apr 2002 17:49:46 - 1.99
> +++ linux_sysvec.c 24 Apr 2002 23:57:23 -
> @@ -711,4 +711,5 @@
> args[3] = tf->tf_esi;
>
Kenneth Culver wrote:
> >
> > Brandon S Allbery KF8NH writes:
> > > On Wed, 2002-04-24 at 10:41, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> > > > Maybe the argument isn't where you expect it to be, but is there.
> > > > Can you make a test program which calls mmap2 with its 6th arg as
> > > > something unique l
> yeah, I did that already, and have been running with that since yesterday
> :-P
>
> still not working right though... I think it has something to do with that
> nargs thing... I'm checking that out now...
>
Ehh, apparently sy_narg is getting set correctly too:
struct linux_mmap2_args {
Sigh. I responded privately, but I see a plethora of mis-informed response
also. Please commit the fix to the S/Key code, rather than disabling
challenge response protocol behavior. There's nothing wrong with
supporting the challenge/response parts of the protocol, and it's even
desirable from a
Alright, so I got tired of trying to figure out if glibc is doing
something wierd or wrong so I downloaded the source for it, and I'm
looking at it now... (for version 2.2.2 which is what we have on FreeBSD's
linux_base-7) and here's what I'm seeing:
pushl %ebp
pushl %ebx
pushl %e
On Wednesday, 24 April 2002 at 3:16:43 -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
>
> The X11 we are talking about here is not "the default X11", which is
> a set of distfiles, but a "ports" X11, which is not, but which is
> likely to be the basis of future distfiles.
Correct.
> So we are really talking about
On Wednesday, 24 April 2002 at 7:27:55 -0500, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 09:06:55AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>> I think the issue here is that individuals make this kind of decision.
>> We need a broader consensus for this kind of change. As Jochem points
>> out
BTW, what I'm suggesting here is the equivilent of the "no_fake_prompts"
setting in pam_opie.so found in -CURRENT. Basically, if the flag is set,
then OPIE doesn't generate fake prompts for users that don't have OPIE
enabled. If the flag is disabled, OPIE will generate prompts for the
users to
Provide me a diff and I'll be happy to review it. I'm not really sure
what you're talking about here and a context diff would remove any
ambiguity.
- Jordan
> Sigh. I responded privately, but I see a plethora of mis-informed response
> also. Please commit the fix to the S/Key code, rather than
> BTW, what I'm suggesting here is the equivilent of the "no_fake_prompts"
> setting in pam_opie.so found in -CURRENT. Basically, if the flag is set,
Again, by all means, generate some diffs and we'll look 'em over. I'm
far less interest in debating this in abstract terms and at least
Joshua p
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 09:21:51AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> On Wednesday, 24 April 2002 at 12:06:39 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > You might want to look at EVMS on Linux. They have a few good ideas,
> > like building a library and API underneath the user interfaces. From
> > what
In routine ffs_balloc(), after we have determined that the block is
already there, we use the following statement to read the block in:
if (flags & B_CLRBUF) {
error = bread(vp, lbn, (int)fs->fs_bsize, NOCRED, &nbp);
if (error) {
br
> Right now, policy differs between branches. releng_4's openssh gives
> a commented alternative in the config, whilst head's gives a commented
> default.
Thanks, these changes look good (and better than what I was
proposing). Since they're both somewhat different, I'll commit them
in tandem but
70 matches
Mail list logo
