Anonymous writes:
> Anonymous writes:
>
>> Baptiste Daroussin writes:
> [...]
>>> You can find the patch against current here:
>>> http://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/update-libedit.patch
>>
>> $ make depend
>> /usr/src/lib/libedit/makelist -h /usr/src/lib/libedit/vi.c > vi.h.tmp &&
>> mv vi
On Nov 5, 2010, at 11:49 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
> On 11/06/2010 00:04, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
Just to add to that (because I do find it a novel idea), 1) how
are you going to properly prevent man in the middle attacks (SSL, TLS,
On 11/06/2010 01:38, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Nov 5, 2010, at 11:49 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
On 11/06/2010 00:04, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
Just to add to that (because I do find it a novel idea), 1) how
are you going to properly prevent m
Similar to r214396, this patch deals with properly capturing error
and passing it up to the caller in mptutil just in case the errno
value gets stomped on by warn*(3); this patch deals with an improper
use of warn(3), and also some malloc(3) errors, as well as shrink down
some static buffers to
Thanks all for your returns,
I'll update my patch during the next week.
Concerning the reverts I'll try to reintegrate them and then send them
to upstream, Because I think it is better to keep in sync to easier
futures updates.
regards,
Bapt
___
freebsd
On 11/06/10 01:04, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>>> Just to add to that (because I do find it a novel idea), 1) how
>>> are you going to properly prevent man in the middle attacks (SSL, TLS,
>>> etc?), and 2) what webserver would you use?
>>
>> ht
On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 10:45:19PM +0200, Gleb Kurtsou wrote:
> I like the idea a lot, but why not to leave symbol files in /usr/obj,
The application where this is most useful (and why we implemented it
originally) is the case where /usr/obj isn't available - for instance,
a binary installation o
On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 01:36:20PM -0400, Ed Maste wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 10:45:19PM +0200, Gleb Kurtsou wrote:
>
> > I like the idea a lot, but why not to leave symbol files in /usr/obj,
>
> The application where this is most useful (and why we implemented it
> originally) is the case
On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 07:56:03PM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 01:36:20PM -0400, Ed Maste wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 10:45:19PM +0200, Gleb Kurtsou wrote:
> >
> > > I like the idea a lot, but why not to leave symbol files in /usr/obj,
> >
> > The application w
Some of the logic could have been simplified in the probe. The
proposed patch makes the detection process a tad bit more
straightforward.
Comments, review (and maybe a commit :P) are more than welcome :).
Thanks!
-Garrett
uart-bus-probe-minor-cleanup.patch
Description: Binary data
___
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010 11:22:53 -0700
Garrett Cooper wrote:
> Some of the logic could have been simplified in the probe. The
> proposed patch makes the detection process a tad bit more
> straightforward.
> Comments, review (and maybe a commit :P) are more than welcome :).
> Thanks!
> -Garrett
On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 07:00:23PM -0400, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Nov 2010 22:39:06 +0100
> Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
>
> > Hi Kib,
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 08:18:04PM +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 06:44:57PM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > >
On Nov 6, 2010, at 9:24 AM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> On 11/06/10 01:04, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
Just to add to that (because I do find it a novel idea), 1) how
are you going to properly prevent man in the middle attacks (SSL, TLS
On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 02:04:20PM -0400, Ed Maste wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 07:56:03PM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 01:36:20PM -0400, Ed Maste wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 10:45:19PM +0200, Gleb Kurtsou wrote:
> > >
> > > > I like the idea a lot, but
On Nov 6, 2010, at 1:33 PM, Devin Teske wrote:
>
> On Nov 6, 2010, at 9:24 AM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
>
>> On 11/06/10 01:04, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>Just to add to that (because I do find it a novel idea), 1) how
> are you go
On Nov 5, 2010, at 10:17 PM, Josh Paetzel wrote:
> On Friday, November 05, 2010 11:48:27 pm Garrett Cooper wrote:
>
>>> Just to add to that (because I do find it a novel idea), 1) how
>>> are you going to properly prevent man in the middle attacks (SSL, TLS,
>>> etc?), and 2) what webserver woul
16 matches
Mail list logo