On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 02:56:17AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Tyan board is fully supported in FreeBSD AMD64. Does anyone know off
> hand? I checked i386 and did not see anything directly stating 7902.
> Unfortunately, I do not have an AMD machine here at the moment, so
> I can't check
In all fairness I'd like to say that Nate put me in touch with someone to
commit the work. At about the same time I discovered a rather annoying bug
(since fixed), and I haven't followed back up.
For those who would like to try it out I just submitted a sparse tree patch
against the developmen
Hey,
I'm using FreeBSD on various servers for many time now, and there is
something that always bothered me. It is related to /etc/passwd and
/etc/pwd.db permissions.
I have custom (0640) permissions on these files. However, each time a user
changes his/her password, the system will reset the pas
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 01:26:57PM -0600, H. S. wrote:
> I'm using FreeBSD on various servers for many time now, and there is
> something that always bothered me. It is related to /etc/passwd and
> /etc/pwd.db permissions.
>
> I have custom (0640) permissions on these files. However, each time a u
Greetings,
I posted a similar message earlier, but I think I was too vague to
solicit any kind of response. I'm also trying to stay relevant to the
forum, but I can only offer the fact that I'm using FreeBSD as my OS of
choice. If this is too far removed from being on topic, I apologize in
ad
Hey,
#define PERM_INSECURE (S_IRUSR|S_IWUSR|S_IRGRP|S_IROTH)
#define PERM_SECURE (S_IRUSR|S_IWUSR)
Thanks, removing S_IROTH worked :-)
While we're at it, what is the cause for the system changing permissions
when I install a port ? (ie /usr/local/sbin and /usr/local/www) As I've
said in my
This may be partially related to the fact that I believe the system generates
those files automatically from /etc/master.passwd. So if you change the perms
on /etc/passwd, then when the system comes along and regenerates the files from
/etc/master.passwd, it would change the permissions during tha
If you post the section(s) of code in question, then you'll probably
elicit some responses. PIPE_BUF is a POSIX defined minimum, so you might
grep for sections of code that contain fpathconf(*, _PC_PIPE_BUF) to
determine if the programmers took this into consideration. At least
you'll be able to
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I think I have found a possible bug in Apache's logging when using their
>"reliable pipe" feature, but I'd like to test it prior to submitting a
>bug report (or possibly a patch.) Of course I posted a message on the
>Apache development forum b
9 matches
Mail list logo
