zebra.log
2011/11/18 09:26:08 OSPF: ospf_recv_packet read length mismatch: ip_len is 64,
but recvmsg returned 84
2011/11/18 09:26:15 OSPF: LSA[Refresh]:ospf_lsa_refresh_walker(): start
2011/11/18 09:26:15 OSPF: LSA[Refresh]: ospf_lsa_refresh_walker(): next index
192
2011/11/18 09:26:15 OSPF: LSA[
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:44:12AM -0800, David Wolfskill wrote:
> At $WORK, we have recently been reminded that xterm doesn't cope all
> that well with being invoked in an environment that returns ENOENT on
> xterm's attempt to open /dev/tty (in main.c).
>
> (The environment in question is a jail
Hello,
The port (ports tree from CVS) ports/textproc/stardict3
ports/textproc/stardict3
PORTVERSION=3.0.3
MAINTAINER= m...@freebsd.org
installs fine on 10-CURRENT, but the application just crahes or runs
into a CPU loop; if it runs into CPU loop there is a core file of 'troff',
i.e. it
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:48:49 -0800
per...@pluto.rain.com articulated:
> Pav Lucistnik wrote:
>
> > The build jails are configured to have only IPv4 address on lo0,
> > but the host have both IPv4 and IPv6 configured on its lo0.
>
> Even disregarding RFC3513, is an IPv6-enabled kernel without an
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> The ports, 10-current, stable/8 and stable/7 were all updated yesterday
> shortly after ISC publicly released the code.
But not releng/*?
--
chs,
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://
On 18/11/2011 15:48, Christer Solskogen wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>> The ports, 10-current, stable/8 and stable/7 were all updated yesterday
>> shortly after ISC publicly released the code.
>
> But not releng/*?
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-secur
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:11:46AM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> ...
> I am sure that the issue is a misconfiguration of the jail or attempt to
> start xterm from the process that has no control terminal. For jail
> misconfiguration, I mean either failure to properly mount devfs into
> the jail /
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 06:13:20AM -0800, David Wolfskill wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:11:46AM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > ...
> > I am sure that the issue is a misconfiguration of the jail or attempt to
> > start xterm from the process that has no control terminal. For jail
> > miscon
Hi everyone,
Can anyone enlighten me as to why this following make fragment doesn't
work? It falls through to .else.
PKGNAMESUFFIX= -devel
.if defined(PKGNAMESUFFIX) && !empty(PKGNAMESUFFIX)
MASTER_SITES= http://www.fwbuilder.org/nightly_builds/fwbuilder-5.0/build-
${BUILD}/
PORTVERSION=
On 18/11/2011 11:48, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
Pav Lucistnik wrote:
The build jails are configured to have only IPv4 address on lo0,
but the host have both IPv4 and IPv6 configured on its lo0.
Even disregarding RFC3513, is an IPv6-enabled kernel without an IPv6
address on lo0 a realistic
Synopsis: [patch] [update] graphics/pinpoint to 0.1.4
Responsible-Changed-From-To: glebius->freebsd-ports
Responsible-Changed-By: glebius
Responsible-Changed-When: Fri Nov 18 19:01:15 UTC 2011
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Back to ports.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=162665
_
Synopsis: [patch] [update] graphics/pinpoint to 0.1.4
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-ports->miwi
Responsible-Changed-By: miwi
Responsible-Changed-When: Fri Nov 18 19:18:19 UTC 2011
Responsible-Changed-Why:
I'll take it.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=162665
On 11/18/2011 06:05, Luchesar V. ILIEV wrote:
> On 18/11/2011 15:48, Christer Solskogen wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>>> The ports, 10-current, stable/8 and stable/7 were all updated yesterday
>>> shortly after ISC publicly released the code.
>>
>> But not releng/
13 matches
Mail list logo
