On Monday, July 29, 2013 3:31:49 am varanasi sainath wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am writing a kernel module in which I am trying to connect to a UNIX
> socket
> (UNIX domain sockets use the file system as their address name space).
> Kernel module (loadable) acts as a client and User
On 29/07/2013 08:31, varanasi sainath wrote:
Hello,
I am writing a kernel module in which I am trying to connect to a UNIX
socket
(UNIX domain sockets use the file system as their address name space).
Kernel module (loadable) acts as a client and User mode program acts as
server,
I have loaded
Hello,
I am writing a kernel module in which I am trying to connect to a UNIX
socket
(UNIX domain sockets use the file system as their address name space).
Kernel module (loadable) acts as a client and User mode program acts as
server,
I have loaded the module using kldload and communication
I think I found the reason for the reported error. In the file
'pracct.c' variable 'acdata' is declared as 'struct acct'. This
structure must be in header 'acct.h', in sub-directory
'/usr/include/sys'. But it is not. In that header there are two similar
structures instead: 'struct acctv2' and '
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, Oleg simonoff wrote:
|
|Hi to users of UNIX!
|
|What unix program is available for a check of a configuration file of the
|kernel?
|
|I`ve got some trouble with configuration of my new kernel but i`d like to
|find my mistakes
Hi to users of UNIX!
What unix program is available for a check of a configuration file of
the kernel?
I`ve got some trouble with configuration of my new kernel but i`d
like to find my mistakes myself
But if those mistakes will't be eliminated independently, i will write
t
12.12.2011 20:35, Matt Mullins wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
10.12.2011 04:22, Matt Mullins wrote:
auth optional pam_deny.so
auth sufficient pam_unix.so no_warn try_first_pass
auth sufficient pam_krb5.so no_warn try_first_pass
Why you just haven't chang
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
> 10.12.2011 04:22, Matt Mullins wrote:
>> auth optional pam_deny.so
>> auth sufficient pam_unix.so no_warn try_first_pass
>> auth sufficient pam_krb5.so no_warn try_first_pass
>
>
> Why you just haven't changed the last line to `require
10.12.2011 04:22, Matt Mullins wrote:
For my systems, the canonical source of authentication information is
a Kerberos server, but I also want to support old-fashioned Unix
passwords for a handful of users (including myself) just in case the
Kerberos system is unreachable. I'm having a b
For my systems, the canonical source of authentication information is
a Kerberos server, but I also want to support old-fashioned Unix
passwords for a handful of users (including myself) just in case the
Kerberos system is unreachable. I'm having a bit of trouble adjusting
to the semanti
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 22:04:17 -0500
Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
> I looked briefly one night at SDF.org.
>
> http://sdf.org/?join
>
> For a contribution of, like, $1.00, you get full access, and I suspect
> that they're running FreeBSD (I haven't actually paid to see, but
> among the list of comma
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:29:26 -0300
"Carlos A. M. dos Santos" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For reasons hard to explain I need to set-up a Unix (preferably
> FreeBSD) shell account that I can access from anywhere.
>
> Arbornet and PBS were the first names that came to my m
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Carlos A. M. dos Santos
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For reasons hard to explain I need to set-up a Unix (preferably
> FreeBSD) shell account that I can access from anywhere.
>
> Arbornet and PBS were the first names that came to my mind, but I'm
>
On 9/27/11 8:29 PM, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote:
> For reasons hard to explain I need to set-up a Unix (preferably
> FreeBSD) shell account that I can access from anywhere.
I've tried Devio.us and it is great as a generic shell ... It even allow
you to setup a personal webpage on
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Kruppa, Peter Ulrich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 27.09.2011 14:29, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> For reasons hard to explain I need to set-up a Unix (preferably
>> FreeBSD) shell account that I can access from anywh
Hi,
On 27.09.2011 14:29, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote:
Hi,
For reasons hard to explain I need to set-up a Unix (preferably
FreeBSD) shell account that I can access from anywhere.
Arbornet and PBS were the first names that came to my mind, but I'm
open to other options. I don't min
Hi,
For reasons hard to explain I need to set-up a Unix (preferably
FreeBSD) shell account that I can access from anywhere.
Arbornet and PBS were the first names that came to my mind, but I'm
open to other options. I don't mind paying a regular fee for it.
Privacy and security a
mmunity
Please subscribe & use chat@
Thanks
Julian
--
Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com
Reply below, not above; Indent with "> "; Cumulative like a play script.
Format: Plain text. Not HTML, multi
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 02:25:52AM +0200, Bernt Hansson wrote:
> 2011-06-17 18:28, Chad Perrin skrev:
> >
> >The fact this is not applicable everywhere is the reason for things
> >like the CC0 waiver, however.
>
> What is CC0?
http://creativecommons.org/choose/zero/
--
Chad Perrin [ original co
2011-06-17 18:28, Chad Perrin skrev:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 07:22:31AM +0200, Bernt Hansson wrote:
2011-06-17 06:53, Adam Vande More skrev:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Bernt Hansson wrote:
Copyright you get without registration and without payment, and one
can't give it up.
Again, re
I think this thread has wandered pretty far from having anything at all to do
with freebsd.
Please find a more appropriate place for this discussion.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ques
On 6/18/11 10:36 AM, Jerry McAllister wrote:
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 03:28:24PM +0200, C. P. Ghost wrote:
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Robert Bonomi
wrote:
I'ts _MUCH_ simpler, to just sign and date a copy of the work, and have a
notary public 'witness' the signature.
True.
Without
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 03:28:24PM +0200, C. P. Ghost wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Robert Bonomi
> wrote:
> > I'ts _MUCH_ simpler, to just sign and date a copy of the work, and have a
> > notary public 'witness' the signature.
>
> True.
>
> Without the service of a public registry
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
>> From cpgh...@cordula.ws Sat Jun 18 08:28:25 2011
>> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 15:28:24 +0200
>> Subject: Re: free sco unix
>> From: "C. P. Ghost"
>> To: Robert Bonomi
>> Cc: freebsd-quest
> From cpgh...@cordula.ws Sat Jun 18 08:28:25 2011
> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 15:28:24 +0200
> Subject: Re: free sco unix
> From: "C. P. Ghost"
> To: Robert Bonomi
> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
>
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Robert Bonomi
> wr
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Robert Bonomi
wrote:
> I'ts _MUCH_ simpler, to just sign and date a copy of the work, and have a
> notary public 'witness' the signature.
True.
Without the service of a public registry of copyrighted works that (I think)
only the US offers, and when you need a l
On 6/17/2011 2:48 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Chad Perrin wrote:
>>> Sigh. If you'd ever actually filed a copyright registration or
>>> transfer form, you would discover that one needs to get them notarized.
>>> (Documenting that a certain document was available and sig
On 6/17/2011 1:57 PM, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:28 AM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> You assert this claim as well, but it's not at all clear whether
> anything but works created by government employees can be placed in
> the public domain.
>
> http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/no-rights
o make sure nobody can make
> money out of "trivial patents", such as patenting the
> word "or" and forcing everybody to pay a license fee for
> using it, there is a certain barrier that prohibits
> copyright claims on "too simple things".
When a lot of peo
--As of June 17, 2011 5:02:09 PM -0500, Robert Bonomi is alleged to have
said:
4) In the U.S., one can officially register copyright on something up to
SIX MONTHS _after_ first 'publication'.
--As for the rest, it is mine.
Actually, you can register it at any time after it has been cr
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 05:02:09PM -0500, Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
> OK, time for somebody who really knows about this stuff to wade in.
[snip]
Thanks for much more clearly stating, in much greater detail, exactly
what I was trying to say -- and for adding a bunch of additional detail.
--
Chad P
> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Fri Jun 17 12:22:42 2011
> Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:03:47 -0500
> From: Alex Stangl
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: free sco unix
>
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:28:51AM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
> > Registr
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:48:25AM -0700, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> >
> > The "poor man's copyright" approach is, I believe, less certain and
> > effective than registration, but if there is a dispute over proper
> > claim of copyright, anything you ca
On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Chad Perrin wrote:
>> Sigh. If you'd ever actually filed a copyright registration or
>> transfer form, you would discover that one needs to get them notarized.
>> (Documenting that a certain document was available and signed at a
>> specific date is what a notary publ
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:57:20AM -0700, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:28 AM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> >> Where i live no need to register, you get copyright if the stuff
> >> fulfills certain criteria, originality is one.
> >
> > Registration aids enforcement. Of course, there's alway
On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:28 AM, Chad Perrin wrote:
>> Where i live no need to register, you get copyright if the stuff
>> fulfills certain criteria, originality is one.
>
> Registration aids enforcement. Of course, there's always the "poor man's
> copyright registration" approach, where the moment y
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:28:51AM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
> Registration aids enforcement. Of course, there's always the "poor man's
> copyright registration" approach, where the moment you have something you
> would like to protect by copyright, you can seal it up in an envelope and
> mail it
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 07:22:31AM +0200, Bernt Hansson wrote:
> 2011-06-17 06:53, Adam Vande More skrev:
> >On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Bernt Hansson wrote:
> >>
> >>Copyright you get without registration and without payment, and one
> >>can't give it up.
> >
> >Again, registration is pretty
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 06:59:57AM +0200, Bernt Hansson wrote:
> 2011-06-17 00:20, Daniel Staal skrev:
> >--As of June 16, 2011 11:21:34 PM +0400, Peter Vereshagin is alleged
> >to have said:
> >
> >(And note that a pure list of facts can't be copyrighted: The phone
> >book is often an example. It'
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 06:14:03AM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 21:35:54 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
> >
> > I've noticed that your mail user agent is including quoted parties'
> > email addresses in the quote notification. In the text immediately
> > following this brief paragraph
2011-06-16 20:30, Chad Perrin skrev:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 02:22:43PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 16/06/2011 13:52, Peter Vereshagin wrote:
unix is a trademark of novell.com.
Unix (note capitalization) is actually a trademark of the Open Group:
http://www.unix.org/
In EU there are
2011-06-17 06:53, Adam Vande More skrev:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Bernt Hanssonwrote:
Unless you work the trademark in you have to pay to register the name.
I'm not sure by what mean by "work the trademark in" but every business is
entitled to use tm or sm identification without reg
2011-06-17 00:20, Daniel Staal skrev:
--As of June 16, 2011 11:21:34 PM +0400, Peter Vereshagin is alleged to
have said:
(And note that a pure list of facts can't be copyrighted: The phone book
is often an example. It's just a list of names and numbers.)
Which is copyrighted, all databases are
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Bernt Hansson wrote:
> Unless you work the trademark in you have to pay to register the name.
>
I'm not sure by what mean by "work the trademark in" but every business is
entitled to use tm or sm identification without registration. However by
officially registe
2011-06-16 19:36, Daniel Staal skrev:
On Thu, June 16, 2011 12:20 pm, Peter Vereshagin wrote:
You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
2011/06/16 11:54:05 -0400 Robert Simmons => To
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org :
RS> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright
RS> http://en.wikipedia
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 21:35:54 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
> I've noticed that your mail user agent is including quoted parties' email
> addresses in the quote notification. In the text immediately following
> this brief paragraph, for instance, my email address was included after
> my name. I would
I've noticed that your mail user agent is including quoted parties' email
addresses in the quote notification. In the text immediately following
this brief paragraph, for instance, my email address was included after
my name. I would appreciate it if you would configure your mail user
agent to no
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 21:03:16 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 02:50:40AM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 04:07:08 +0400, Peter Vereshagin wrote:
> > >
> > > It's just a matter of a freedom to speech to me. And to everyone else
> > > I believe.
> >
> > Copyright
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 02:50:40AM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 04:07:08 +0400, Peter Vereshagin wrote:
> >
> > It's just a matter of a freedom to speech to me. And to everyone else
> > I believe.
>
> Copyright and ownership of creation just makes sure that someone can't
> expres
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 07:43:59PM -0400, Daniel Staal wrote:
>
> (The other common case in the USA is road maps. A simple 'lines following
> their geographic contours, labeled' is a set of facts. One result of this
> is that most road maps in the US either are missing some minor roads, or
>
On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 04:07:08 +0400, Peter Vereshagin
wrote:
> And does FreeBSD Foundation own its FreeBSD UNIX then? If it does, did it pay
> for it? Does it certify its FreeBSD as a UNIX and how much does it pay?
Basically, the main page says "based on", this states a
fact
On Jun 16, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Peter Vereshagin wrote:
> And does FreeBSD Foundation own its FreeBSD UNIX then? If it does, did it pay
> for it? Does it certify its FreeBSD as a UNIX and how much does it pay?
The FreeBSD Foundation is a non-profit organization which supports and
represen
You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
2011/06/16 18:20:43 -0400 Daniel Staal => To Peter Vereshagin :
DS> > CP> UNIX, the name, is a trademark. We can use it all we like here,
DS> > speaking
DS> >
DS> > Do we need a license to use it? ;-)
DS>
--As of June 17, 2011 12:47:45 AM +0200, Polytropon is alleged to have said:
(And note that a pure list of facts can't be copyrighted: The phone book
is often an example. It's just a list of names and numbers.)
Interesting, never tought of that, but sounds obvious.
--As for the rest, it is
I am out of the office until June 20th. I will only have intermittent access to
email. I will read and reply to your message when I get back to the office.
If you need assistance with a Berkeley DB or Product Management issue while I
am away, please contact ashok.jo...@oracle.com.
ark: You can use it to
> identify.
That's correct, and you can see an evidence directly on
the FreeBSD main web page:
Based on BSD UNIX(R)
This indicates that the name "UNIX" is a registered
trademark (which is registered to its owner).
> It's extremely hard t
--As of June 16, 2011 11:21:34 PM +0400, Peter Vereshagin is alleged to
have said:
CP> UNIX, the name, is a trademark. We can use it all we like here,
speaking
Do we need a license to use it? ;-)
According to what I recall of my 'business law for managers' classes: As
lon
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 19:29:42 +0400, Peter Vereshagin
wrote:
> Lawyers are so lawyers ;-)
Two lawyers, three opinions. :-)
--
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org m
You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
2011/06/16 12:30:07 -0600 Chad Perrin => To
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org :
CP> * The UNIX source code's copyright is held by . . . damn. It keeps
I always told this name is a kind of Black Label. Companies to hold it u
You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
2011/06/16 12:46:20 -0600 Chad Perrin => To
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org :
CP> > But both are just words/phrases, right?
CP>
CP> Here's an example of the difference:
Good example, it's on-topic ;-)
CP> UN
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:20:11PM +0400, Peter Vereshagin wrote:
>
> But both are just words/phrases, right?
Here's an example of the difference:
UNIX, the name, is a trademark. We can use it all we like here, speaking
about the UNIX trademark, its applicability, who owns the tra
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 02:22:43PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 16/06/2011 13:52, Peter Vereshagin wrote:
> >
> > unix is a trademark of novell.com.
>
> Unix (note capitalization) is actually a trademark of the Open Group:
> http://www.unix.org/
In case it was
You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
2011/06/16 13:36:32 -0400 Daniel Staal => To
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org :
DS> > RS> Copyright pertains to the source code. Trademark pertains to the use
DS> > of
DS> > RS> signs, symbols, names, logos, etc.
DS> >
DS> > Source code itself can
On Thu, June 16, 2011 12:20 pm, Peter Vereshagin wrote:
> You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
> 2011/06/16 11:54:05 -0400 Robert Simmons => To
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org :
> RS> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright
> RS> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark
>
> I'll surel
On 16 June 2011 17:47, Robert Simmons wrote:
> On Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:31:19 PM Reko Turja wrote:
>> In that fictional world MySQL needed a fork and some GPL'd programs
>> have been retroactively made completely closed source, forking denied
>> after taking the issue into court...
>
> I thou
On Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:31:19 PM Reko Turja wrote:
> In that fictional world MySQL needed a fork and some GPL'd programs
> have been retroactively made completely closed source, forking denied
> after taking the issue into court...
I thought that Sun reversed that decision in 2008. Can you
--
From: "Robert Simmons"
thrown out of court. Additionally, the source code is GPL, so even
if in the
fictional world of Linus taking the trademark elsewhere, you can
fork the code
and call it Morphtkdlfgjfjdsksjfnmvmdkedkfjgjg, and you would b
You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
2011/06/16 11:54:05 -0400 Robert Simmons => To
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org :
RS> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright
RS> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark
I'll surely will when I'll have some to trade ;-)
RS> Copyright pertains to th
On Thursday, June 16, 2011 11:47:32 AM Peter Vereshagin wrote:
> This will require some efforts from Open Group. Does FreeBSD Foundation pay
> for that?
Not necessary. FreeBSD does not use (want to use/need to use) the UNIX
trademark and according to the USL vs. BSDi court case, FreeBS
On Thursday, June 16, 2011 11:29:42 AM Peter Vereshagin wrote:
> There should be a difference recognized between "own a Unix trademark" by
> http://www.unix.org/trademark.html and "ownership of the Unix copyrights"
> by http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=201003
. Copyright applies to the
As I suspected ;-)
RS> So, if you wanted to call your software "UNIX" you would need to contact
Open
RS> Group and make sure that your software licences the trademark, and complies
This will require some efforts from Open Group. Does FreeBSD Foundation
You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
2011/06/16 14:22:43 +0100 Matthew Seaman =>
To freebsd-questions@freebsd.org :
MS> > CB> FreeBSD is a UNIX-like clone, which is indeed free, whereas UNIX is
MS> > CB> still the proprietary property of AT&T/Bel
On Thursday, June 16, 2011 09:22:43 AM Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 16/06/2011 13:52, Peter Vereshagin wrote:
> > You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
> > 2011/06/15 17:08:31 -0400 Chris Brennan => To
> > Thomas Hansen : CB> FreeBSD is a UNIX-
On 16/06/2011 13:52, Peter Vereshagin wrote:
> You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
> 2011/06/15 17:08:31 -0400 Chris Brennan => To Thomas
> Hansen :
> CB> FreeBSD is a UNIX-like clone, which is indeed free, whereas UNIX is
> CB> still the proprieta
You can't take no for an answer, freebsd-questions!
2011/06/15 17:08:31 -0400 Chris Brennan => To Thomas
Hansen :
CB> FreeBSD is a UNIX-like clone, which is indeed free, whereas UNIX is
CB> still the proprietary property of AT&T/Bell Labs.
unix is a trademark of novell.c
Le 15/06/2011 à 22:34:23+0200, Thomas Hansen a écrit
> one of my mates teacher says that unix is free and your system running
> like UnixWare / SCO UNIX and and that unix is free
>
>
> Do your BSD kernel run the same unix kernel as unixware
Take a look :
http://
-- Forwarded message --
From: Chris Brennan
Date: Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:06 PM
Subject: Re: free sco unix
To: Thomas Hansen
'y' and 't' are too close in mutt :(
* Thomas Hansen [2011-06-16 00:07:11 +0200]:
This was off-list, redirecting back.
&g
On 15/06/2011 21:34, Thomas Hansen wrote:
> one of my mates teacher says that unix is free and your system running
> like UnixWare / SCO UNIX and and that unix is free
Some Unix is free (the best sorts), others are most certainly not free
at all.
FreeBSD is pretty much the opposite
* Thomas Hansen [2011-06-15 22:34:23 +0200]:
> one of my mates teacher says that unix is free and your system running
> like UnixWare / SCO UNIX and and that unix is free
>
>
> Do your BSD kernel run the same unix kernel as unixware
FreeBSD is a UNIX-like clone, which
one of my mates teacher says that unix is free and your system running
like UnixWare / SCO UNIX and and that unix is free
Do your BSD kernel run the same unix kernel as unixware
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http
m missing.
>
> When he says "shell terminal", think "command prompt". nc is netcat, but I
> didn't know Windows had that. In your friend's defense, I use Windows every
> day (at work) and I can't always remember what things are called. Especially
>
27;edification' as a search term.
Although I am familiar with basic computer operation, I've been trying
to understand a very experienced programmer friend that mixes Linux/Unix
terminology in his vocabulary under the assumption that everyone knows
the language.
Being familiar only
I need to count number of connections to php's cgi unix socket (created with
spawn-fci). When nginx initiates a connection to cgi socket one of spawned
php processes accepts this connection, processes input and outputs data. But
number of processes is limited and i want to be able to mo
On Sep 14, 2010, at 11:16 AM, d...@safeport.com wrote:
>> A bit of experimentation suggests that "chmod 7500 .procmail" are the
>> permissions involved, which are silly. No group permissions enabled means
>> setgid is meaningless, and I don't see any value for using the sticky bit
>> here, eith
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:04:58 -0700, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> On Sep 14, 2010, at 11:01 AM, Polytropon wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 13:32:40 -0400 (EDT), d...@safeport.com wrote:
> >> I found several directories whose permissions where set to
> >>
> >> dr-s--S--T 2 user group 512 Feb 22 2010
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010, Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Sep 14, 2010, at 11:01 AM, Polytropon wrote:
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 13:32:40 -0400 (EDT), d...@safeport.com wrote:
I found several directories whose permissions where set to
dr-s--S--T 2 user group 512 Feb 22 2010 .procmail/
All were .procmail
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010, Polytropon wrote:
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 13:32:40 -0400 (EDT), d...@safeport.com wrote:
I found several directories whose permissions where set to
dr-s--S--T 2 user group 512 Feb 22 2010 .procmail/
All were .procmail which is what we set for procmail logging and supp
On Sep 14, 2010, at 11:01 AM, Polytropon wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 13:32:40 -0400 (EDT), d...@safeport.com wrote:
>> I found several directories whose permissions where set to
>>
>> dr-s--S--T 2 user group 512 Feb 22 2010 .procmail/
>>
>> All were .procmail which is what we set for proc
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 13:32:40 -0400 (EDT), d...@safeport.com wrote:
> I found several directories whose permissions where set to
>
>dr-s--S--T 2 user group 512 Feb 22 2010 .procmail/
>
> All were .procmail which is what we set for procmail logging and supporting
> recipes. In reading 'ma
I found several directories whose permissions where set to
dr-s--S--T 2 user group 512 Feb 22 2010 .procmail/
All were .procmail which is what we set for procmail logging and supporting
recipes. In reading 'man ls' it seems (to me) this might result from losing the
execute bit on the di
On 7/09/2010 12:00 PM, Frank Shute wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 11:39:19AM +1000, Danny Carroll wrote:
>>
>> Today I decided to make a backup of some of my unix data to an XP
>> machine in preparation for a migration.
>> I set windows XP backup running and when it
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 11:39:19AM +1000, Danny Carroll wrote:
>
> Today I decided to make a backup of some of my unix data to an XP
> machine in preparation for a migration.
> I set windows XP backup running and when it started backing up files in
> my home directory I noticed
Today I decided to make a backup of some of my unix data to an XP
machine in preparation for a migration.
I set windows XP backup running and when it started backing up files in
my home directory I noticed that it set u-x permissions on all of the
files.
Directories are unaffected.
If I use
liver
P.S. Please respond also to my eMail address, thank you very much.
2009-09-03 19:47:49: (mod_access.c.135) -- mod_access_uri_handler called
2009-09-03 19:47:49: (mod_fastcgi.c.3644) handling it in mod_fastcgi
2009-09-03 19:47:49: (mod_fastcgi.c.1742) connect failed: Connection
refused on
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Karl Vogel
> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 17 May 2009 09:12:57 -0700,
> >> Kelly Jones said:
>
> K> I like this plan because it does versioned backups, and doesn't backup
> K> identical files twice. I dislike it because I lose Mozy's unlimited disk
> K> space.
>
> K> % Is
>> On Sun, 17 May 2009 09:12:57 -0700,
>> Kelly Jones said:
K> I like this plan because it does versioned backups, and doesn't backup
K> identical files twice. I dislike it because I lose Mozy's unlimited disk
K> space.
K> % Is there software that already does this?
I have a 3-Tbyte server
Is there any possibility of using your own media locally - such as
tape or a large USB attached disk?If security is such a primary
concern, I can't see sending the data to that type of offsite thing.
Get a couple of large USB SATAs and use dump(8) to back the stuff up
on them.Write them
m secure and reasonable?
>
> % Will backing up the 0-byte file this way make it easy to guess my
> blowfish key?
>
> % Is there software that already does this?
>
> % Can this plan be improved?
>
>
> % Does anyone offer unlimited space for Unix backups?
> (safe
Kelly Jones wrote:
I tried using Mozy for backups because they offer unlimited space, but
1) they don't support FreeBSD, 2) they encrypt file contents, but NOT
file names, and 3) they don't do true versioned backups. Easy
workaround for 1): rsync to a Mac/Windows and backup from there, but
2) and
secure and reasonable?
% Will backing up the 0-byte file this way make it easy to guess my
blowfish key?
% Is there software that already does this?
% Can this plan be improved?
% Does anyone offer unlimited space for Unix backups?
(safesnaps.com)
% Any general thoughts/comments
1 - 100 of 691 matches
Mail list logo
