On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 18:22:33 +0200
Terje Elde wrote:
> On 13. aug. 2013, at 16:30, "O. Hartmann"
> wrote:
> > What is going wrong?
>
> Are you unable to connect, or do you get an error message? If you do,
> what is it?
>
> Terje
I always get this message:
psql postgres pgsql
Password for use
On 13. aug. 2013, at 16:30, "O. Hartmann" wrote:
> What is going wrong?
Are you unable to connect, or do you get an error message? If you do, what is
it?
Terje
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/fr
or "pgsql" remotely isn't possible any more.
> >>
> >> The appropriate lines in pg_hba.conf are:
> >>
> >> local all pgsql md5
> >> hostssl all pgsql 0.0.0.0/0 md5
> >>
> >> The funny thing is: when login locally
13.08.2013 17:30, O. Hartmann wrote:
For the past I ran PostgreSQL 9.2 servers on FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT
successfully. But by now, out of the blue, login as the database's
supervisor "pgsql" remotely isn't possible any more.
The appropriate lines in pg_hba.conf are:
lo
13.08.2013 17:30, O. Hartmann wrote:
For the past I ran PostgreSQL 9.2 servers on FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT
successfully. But by now, out of the blue, login as the database's
supervisor "pgsql" remotely isn't possible any more.
The appropriate lines in pg_hba.conf are:
lo
For the past I ran PostgreSQL 9.2 servers on FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT
successfully. But by now, out of the blue, login as the database's
supervisor "pgsql" remotely isn't possible any more.
The appropriate lines in pg_hba.conf are:
local all pgsql md5
hostssl all pgsql
;
> Hello,
>
> > Recently I've downloaded the FreeBSD 8.3 Release ISO Image
> > (FreeBSD-8.3-RELEASE-i386-dvd1 (1).iso) and installed in our machine.
> > Actually our requirement is to check the TCP MD5 support on
> > FreeBSD8.3 .
> >
> > But we were not
On 9/6/2012 11:16 AM, SivaReddy Obili wrote:
>
> But we were not able to configure BGP MD5 on that machine.
Perhaps you could post some details as to what you tried. Did you
recompile the kernel with MD5 support ?
In the kernel, you need
optionsTCP_SIGNATURE
optionsIPSEC
Le Thu, 6 Sep 2012 20:46:53 +0530,
SivaReddy Obili a écrit :
Hello,
> Recently I've downloaded the FreeBSD 8.3 Release ISO Image
> (FreeBSD-8.3-RELEASE-i386-dvd1 (1).iso) and installed in our machine.
> Actually our requirement is to check the TCP MD5 support on
> FreeBSD8.3 .
Hi Team,
Recently I've downloaded the FreeBSD 8.3 Release ISO Image
(FreeBSD-8.3-RELEASE-i386-dvd1 (1).iso) and installed in our machine.
Actually our requirement is to check the TCP MD5 support on FreeBSD8.3 .
But we were not able to configure BGP MD5 on that machine.
Can someone p
. Ruwe wrote:
> > For setting the dafault hash used to hash /etc/master.passwd, it
> > has been recommended changing md5 for something more secure in the
> > sense of being more expensive to crack.
> >
> > The handbook describes the procedure used in
> > http://ww
On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 18:28:38 -0400
Lowell Gilbert wrote:
> "Christopher J. Ruwe" writes:
>
> > For setting the dafault hash used to hash /etc/master.passwd, it has
> > been recommended changing md5 for something more secure in the
> > sense of being mo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6/23/2012 9:37 AM, Christopher J. Ruwe wrote:
> For setting the dafault hash used to hash /etc/master.passwd, it
> has been recommended changing md5 for something more secure in the
> sense of being more expensive to crack.
>
&g
"Christopher J. Ruwe" writes:
> For setting the dafault hash used to hash /etc/master.passwd, it has
> been recommended changing md5 for something more secure in the sense of
> being more expensive to crack.
>
> The handbook describes the procedure used in
>
On Jun 23, 2012, at 6:37 AM, Christopher J. Ruwe wrote:
> For setting the dafault hash used to hash /etc/master.passwd, it has
> been recommended changing md5 for something more secure in the sense of
> being more expensive to crack.
>
> The handbook describes the procedure
been recommended changing md5 for something more secure in the
sense of being more expensive to crack.
is md5 that easy to crack?
It has been discussed recently, cf
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/2012-June/006271.html
or virtually the first half of
http
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 15:40:51 +0200 (CEST)
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> > For setting the dafault hash used to hash /etc/master.passwd, it has
> > been recommended changing md5 for something more secure in the
> > sense of being more expensive to crack.
>
> is md5 that eas
For setting the dafault hash used to hash /etc/master.passwd, it has
been recommended changing md5 for something more secure in the sense of
being more expensive to crack.
is md5 that easy to crack?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http
For setting the dafault hash used to hash /etc/master.passwd, it has
been recommended changing md5 for something more secure in the sense of
being more expensive to crack.
The handbook describes the procedure used in
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/crypt.html.
Allegedly
I tried to attach a geli encrypted partition from a disk of a different
machine attached via eSATA, but I got:
geli: MD5 hash mismatch for ada1s2e.
Putting the disk back to the old machine, I was able to attach and use
the geli encrypted partition without an error.
Before I investigate
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Ruben R. Shkhikyan wrote:
> Hi,
> why the MD5 and SHA256 of "FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.img" are wrong?
>
> (MD5: FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.img =
> 79ddd8f3422e209ae9bd11fee4e399eb) - Your Calculation
> (MD5: FreeBSD-9
Hi,
why the MD5 and SHA256 of "FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.img" are wrong?
(MD5: FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.img =
79ddd8f3422e209ae9bd11fee4e399eb) - Your Calculation
(MD5: FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.img =
F9DDF26894FCF7EA5813D7D9099FF6A4) - My Calculation (w
It's OK, You've already changed the
"FreeBSD-9.0-RELEASE-i386-memstick.im" on site, the checksums are the
same as I calculate.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Ruben
Original Message
Subject:wrong MD5 and SHA256 ?!?
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 02:29:08 +
On 05/11/2010 06:47 AM, Warren Block wrote:
cal on FreeBSD 8 does highlight the current date.
And then we have ncal(1), which, besides highlighting of
the current day, also has the following nice features:
It starts the weeks on Monday.
It can print the number of the week below each week col
> D> 2. Why doesn't md5(1) have a "check" option? Seems to me requiring a
> D> manual inspection is error-prone at best, and makes scripting
> D> unecessarily complicated.
>
Would something like the attached patch be good?
It adds a -c option for a string
ou definitely need either the Linux compatibility stuff or a decent
version of ncurses installed for this to work. The basic version of
tput (/usr/bin/tput) will not do the trick.
D> 2. Why doesn't md5(1) have a "check" option? Seems to me requiring a
D> manual
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:26:35PM -0500, Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Mon May 10 22:25:31 2010
> > Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 17:35:45 -0800
> > From: David Allen
> > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> > Subject: md5(1) and cal(1)
> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Mon May 10 22:25:31 2010
> Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 17:35:45 -0800
> From: David Allen
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: md5(1) and cal(1)
>
> 1. Why doesn't cal(1) hilight the current day?
Because we're
Warren Block writes:
> >> 1. Why doesn't cal(1) hilight the current day?
>
> cal on FreeBSD 8 does highlight the current date.
Confirmed for both xterm and whatever the console driver is
using.
Robert Huff
___
On Tue, 11 May 2010, andrew clarke wrote:
On Mon 2010-05-10 17:35:45 UTC-0800, David Allen
(the.real.david.al...@gmail.com) wrote:
1. Why doesn't cal(1) hilight the current day? Hell, some days I'm
not even sure what day or week it is, so after typing 'cal', I have to
type in 'date', and th
d by the behavior of the cal utility and the extra work I'm
> forced to do.
cal(1) is pretty old. I suspect it was written partly so the output
could be printed out on paper.
/usr/ports/deskutils/cal might be more your taste.
> 2. Why doesn't md5(1) have a "check"
tility and the extra work I'm
> forced to do.
If I don't actually know the date, I typically use the date command to
find out. I use cal to do things like check dates of other days in the
preceding or following weeks.
>
> 2. Why doesn't md5(1) have a "che
always successful, so I
typically end up reaching for my mouse and hilight the date manually.
But after doing that I'm just as annoyed by not knowing the date as
I'm annoyed by the behavior of the cal utility and the extra work I'm
forced to do.
2. Why doesn't md5(1) have a "c
On 4 April 2010 11:02, gahn wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> I am trying to compile the smaba34 but somehow it failed MD5 Checksum and
> SHA256 Checksum:
>
>
> # make all
> ===> Vulnerability check disabled, database no
Hi all:
I am trying to compile the smaba34 but somehow it failed MD5 Checksum and
SHA256 Checksum:
# make all
===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
===> Found saved configuration for samba34-3
On Monday 08 March 2010 11:25:20 Christoph Kukulies wrote:
> I was trying to determine a md5sum from a DVD I had inserted into a
> FreeBSD 8.0
> on my Dell Inspiron 9400 notebook.
>
> I thought dd if=/dev/acd0 | md5 would work but I got "Invalid argument".
>
>
I was trying to determine a md5sum from a DVD I had inserted into a
FreeBSD 8.0
on my Dell Inspiron 9400 notebook.
I thought dd if=/dev/acd0 | md5 would work but I got "Invalid argument".
Trying dd if=/dev/acd0 bs=1048k | md5 worked in so far that it didn't
yield an error
bu
On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 09:07:30AM +0530, Shripad R. wrote:
> MD5 (8.0-RELEASE-amd64-dvd1.iso) = 44c016ae8812a266f710d1845722366d
> MD5 (8.0-RELEASE-amd64-dvd1.iso.gz) = add311be2d189cde1d47ba515c05f440
>
> totally different. Can somebody plz confirm ?
Yes. Different files, di
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 4:37 AM, Shripad R. wrote:
> hi,
> i just wanted to upgrade my current 7.2 to 8.0 and wanted to do it from
> scratch so downloaded 8.0-RELEASE-amd64-dvd1.iso.gz.
> But the md5 mentioned here
> http://www.freebsd.org/releases/8.0R/announce.html is :
>
hi,
i just wanted to upgrade my current 7.2 to 8.0 and wanted to do it from
scratch so downloaded 8.0-RELEASE-amd64-dvd1.iso.gz.
But the md5 mentioned here
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/8.0R/announce.html is :
MD5 (8.0-RELEASE-amd64-dvd1.iso) = 44c016ae8812a266f710d1845722366d
And the md5 i am
On 23 August 2009, at 10:56, andrew clarke wrote:
On Sun 2009-08-23 10:24:53 UTC+0200, Vincent Zee (zen...@xs4all.nl)
wrote:
===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
===> Extracting for netatalk-2.0.4,1
=> MD5 Checksum mismatch for netatalk-2.0.4.tar.bz2.
=> SHA
On Sun 2009-08-23 10:24:53 UTC+0200, Vincent Zee (zen...@xs4all.nl) wrote:
> ===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
> ===> Extracting for netatalk-2.0.4,1
> => MD5 Checksum mismatch for netatalk-2.0.4.tar.bz2.
> => SHA256 Checksum mismatch for netatalk-2.0
aches
netatalk it gives this error message:
-
===> Vulnerability check disabled, database not found
===> Extracting for netatalk-2.0.4,1
=> MD5 Checksum mismatch for netatalk-2.0.4.tar.bz2.
=> SHA256 Checksum mismatch for netatalk-2.0.4.tar.bz2.
[snip]
===> G
MD5 seems to be compromised by potential collision attacks. So I tried
to figure out how I can use another hash for security purposes when
hashing passwords for local users on a FreeBSD 7/8 box, like root or
local box administration. Looking at man login.conf reveals only three
possible hash
: Johan Hendriks
CC: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Onderwerp: Re: pkg_delete delete files even if md5 check fails
On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 03:25:30PM +0100, Johan Hendriks wrote:
> How can i tell pkg_delete to delete all files of a package even if the md5
> checks fail?
Does the -f flag d
On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 03:25:30PM +0100, Johan Hendriks wrote:
> How can i tell pkg_delete to delete all files of a package even if the md5
> checks fail?
Does the -f flag do this?
--
| Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com |
| Parodius Netw
How can i tell pkg_delete to delete all files of a package even if the md5
checks fail?
Regards,
Johan Hendriks
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i was downloading 7.0-RELEASE,
and found the following MD5 errors:
doc/
ERROR: MD5 (doc.cc) = a83976995e055dbe67030397902c5ab9
MD5SUM MD5 (doc.cc) = 662363b086db1164eb922024428df2df
ERROR: MD5 (install.sh) = 0ddd67ac6a0ca00e0131f63bcde9b145
MD5SUM MD5 (install.sh
i was downloading 7.0-RELEASE,
and found the following MD5 errors:
doc/
ERROR: MD5 (doc.cc) = a83976995e055dbe67030397902c5ab9
MD5SUM MD5 (doc.cc) = 662363b086db1164eb922024428df2df
ERROR: MD5 (install.sh) = 0ddd67ac6a0ca00e0131f63bcde9b145
MD5SUM MD5 (install.sh
> It's impossible to tell which one of these is more likely without more
> information (e.g. did you receive any other messages, such as CRC errors
> on the drive?)
No, I didn't receive more information. Can I exclude that a
combination of gmirror and geli is responsible for this error? Because
one
Thomas Hobbes wrote:
Hi,
what is this kind of error's meaning?
Usually it means your data is corrupted. Some possible reasons are:
- bad sectors or media deficiencies
- power failures or fluctuations that affected the drive and/or the
controller
- bad cables
- bugs, either in hardware (moth
> It means that metadata (in the last provider's sector) is in an
> inconsistent state. Someone/something changed it.
The error occurs while attaching a device on a gmirrored disk. Am I
right assuming that the responisble change happens right between
initialisation and attachment?
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 08:07:49PM +0200, Thomas Hobbes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> what is this kind of error's meaning?
It means that metadata (in the last provider's sector) is in an
inconsistent state. Someone/something changed it.
--
Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl
[EMAI
Hi,
what is this kind of error's meaning?
Greetings
elesdo
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
ssword using DES. I have already configured /etc/login.conf for
MD5, but it still goes with DES:
*$ grep passwd /etc/login.conf
:passwd_format=md5:\
# :passwd_format=des:\
$*
What could I be doing wrong?
If that matters, this system has been receiving system and /etc
upgrades
rd using DES. I have already configured /etc/login.conf for
> MD5, but it still goes with DES:
>
> *$ grep passwd /etc/login.conf
>:passwd_format=md5:\
> # :passwd_format=des:\
> $*
>
>What could I be doing wrong?
>
>If that matters, this system
e
> password using DES. I have already configured /etc/login.conf for MD5,
> but it still goes with DES:
>
> *$ grep passwd /etc/login.conf
>
> :passwd_format=md5:\
>
> # :passwd_format=des:\
> $*
After changing that, did you
This question must be really dumb, but I cannot find its answer.
In a somewhat recently updated RELENG_6 FreeBSD, whenever I run the
program /usr/bin/passwd to change an users password, it encrypts the
password using DES. I have already configured /etc/login.conf for MD5,
but it still
On removing the old version of amanda-client port, I got this error message:
pkg_delete: '/usr/local/lib/libamandad.a' fails original MD5 checksum -
not deleted.
Oh my, I thought, I have a corrupt library. This is probably what caused
all those weird problems I was having with Aman
Great...thanks a lot..
Greetz
2007/6/8, Beech Rintoul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 2007/6/8, Beech Rintoul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Friday 08 June 2007, Agus said:
> > > Hi all,
> > > I am trying to install /usr/ports/net/rsync and i am getting
> > &
> 2007/6/8, Beech Rintoul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Friday 08 June 2007, Agus said:
> > > Hi all,
> > > I am trying to install /usr/ports/net/rsync and i am getting
> > > MD5 checksum mismatch for rsync-2.6.6.tar.gz
> > >
> > > th
l,
> I am trying to install /usr/ports/net/rsync and i am getting MD5
> checksum mismatch for rsync-2.6.6.tar.gz
>
> then it says if u are sure u want to override this check, type make
> NO_CHECKSUM=yes
>
> What does it mean that the MD5 and sha256 checksums are wrong?
>
On Friday 08 June 2007, Agus said:
> Hi all,
> I am trying to install /usr/ports/net/rsync and i am getting MD5
> checksum mismatch for rsync-2.6.6.tar.gz
>
> then it says if u are sure u want to override this check, type make
> NO_CHECKSUM=yes
>
> What does it mean
On 6/9/07, Agus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,
I am trying to install /usr/ports/net/rsync and i am getting MD5 checksum
mismatch for rsync-2.6.6.tar.gz
then it says if u are sure u want to override this check, type make
NO_CHECKSUM=yes
What does it mean that the MD5 and
Hi all,
I am trying to install /usr/ports/net/rsync and i am getting MD5 checksum
mismatch for rsync-2.6.6.tar.gz
then it says if u are sure u want to override this check, type make
NO_CHECKSUM=yes
What does it mean that the MD5 and sha256 checksums are wrong?
How can i solve it??
thankss
Hello,
Seemingly like you don't have rfc 2385 support in your kernel
from /usr/src/sys/conf/NOTES :
# TCP_SIGNATURE adds support for RFC 2385 (TCP-MD5) digests. These are
# carried in TCP option 19. This option is commonly used to protect
# TCP sessions (e.g. BGP) where IPSEC is not avai
Hello,
Does anyone know if TCP-MD5 is working with OpenBGP on Freebsd ?
I've got a Freebsd 6.1 system (6.1-RELEASE-p5) on which I've tried both
openbgpd and openbgpd-devel.
The system has a test session now with a Cisco 3750 equipment.
On the OpenBGPD machine I have setup
On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 11:33:14AM +0100, Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
> On 12/8/05, James Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Inside the CHECKSUM.MD5 file, however, it says that its own
> > checksum should be
> >
> > MD5 (CHECKSUM.MD5) = 6ee62cd847afff4cadf66483
On Thursday 08 December 2005 10:33, Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
> On 12/8/05, James Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Inside the CHECKSUM.MD5 file, however, it says that its own
> > checksum should be
> >
> > MD5 (CHECKSUM.MD5) = 6ee62cd847afff4cadf6648389c6
On 12/8/05, James Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Inside the CHECKSUM.MD5 file, however, it says that its own
> checksum should be
>
> MD5 (CHECKSUM.MD5) = 6ee62cd847afff4cadf6648389c67a11
This is interesting; how can the MD5 of a file be contained inside the
file itself? Or r
When I go to ftp.freebsd.org and download
/pub/FreeBSD/releases/i386/6.0-RELEASE/src/CHECKSUM.MD5
and run md5 against it, I get the checksum
MD5 (CHECKSUM.MD5) = d0dc2749908246ee8e91de602bb422b2
Inside the CHECKSUM.MD5 file, however, it says that its own
checksum should be
MD5 (CHECKSUM.MD5
I've tried several times to download the ISOs for FreeBSD 5.4RELEASE from
different FTP sites listed in the handbook. Everytime I get a failure when
checking 5.4-RELEASE-i386-disc1.iso. Disc 2 is fine. Is this just me?
Duncan
___
freebsd-questions@
Joe Schmoe wrote:
Since I have no 4.5/4.6 systems up and running, and
since I cannot find old ftp trees with them on it, my
question is: how can I find the distinfo file that
came with the ports tree of a specific port from
4.5-release ?
You will find your file at this site:
http://www.freeb
hello,
there is an app I need that is no longer included in
the ports tree. I want to search for the .tar.gz file
with google - I am sure it is out there somewhere -
but I do not know the name.
Further, I want to be sure I am getting a good copy,
so I would also need to know the md5 hash
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:55:11 +0200, Mario Hoerich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # Matt Kosht:
> > Is there a simple way to compare the md5 checksum of a file, to a file
> > that contains possibly more than one md5 checksum entry in it? Kind
> > of like mdsum -c d
# Matt Kosht:
> Is there a simple way to compare the md5 checksum of a file, to a file
> that contains possibly more than one md5 checksum entry in it? Kind
> of like mdsum -c does?
Perfect job for a shellscript. :)
#!/bin/sh
if [ -z "$2" ]; then
echo &
Compare md5 sums:
$ md5 file1 file2 file3 > checksum.md5
$ md5 file1 file2 file3 | diff checksum.md5 -
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 10:29:39PM -0500, Matt Kosht wrote:
> Is there a simple way to compare the md5 checksum of a file, to a file
> that contains possibly more than one md5 checksum
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2005-03-30, Lowell Gilbert scribbled these
curious markings:
> Matt Kosht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Is there a simple way to compare the md5 checksum of a file, to a file
>> that contains possibly more than one
Matt Kosht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there a simple way to compare the md5 checksum of a file, to a file
> that contains possibly more than one md5 checksum entry in it? Kind
> of like mdsum -c does?
I've never heard of md
Is there a simple way to compare the md5 checksum of a file, to a file
that contains possibly more than one md5 checksum entry in it? Kind
of like mdsum -c does?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 11:31:50AM +0100, Xian wrote:
> I am trying to compile a program using md5 and I had some problems. So I made
> a test program to see if I was using it properly, and it still doesn't work.
> ...
> The problem is it won't compile giving:
> [EMA
t; Good day!
> > > After downloading disc1 and disc2 of freebsd 5.3, my boss told me to
> > > verify the download using md5.
> >
> > Good thinking.
> >
> > > And to my surprise, none of those two iso's have the same md5 as that
> > > of the md5
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 12:02:13 +0200, Giorgos Keramidas
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2004-11-08 00:41, Mark Jayson Alvarez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Good day!
> > After downloading disc1 and disc2 of freebsd 5.3, my boss told me to
> > verify the down
On 2004-11-08 00:41, Mark Jayson Alvarez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Good day!
> After downloading disc1 and disc2 of freebsd 5.3, my boss told me to
> verify the download using md5.
Good thinking.
> And to my surprise, none of those two iso's have the same md5 as that
Good day!
After downloading disc1 and disc2 of freebsd 5.3, my
boss told me to verify the download using md5. And to
my surprise, none of those two iso's have the same md5
as that of the md5 written in CHECKSUM.md5.
This is the first time I ever use the md5 and for so
long, I didn
I am trying to compile a program using md5 and I had some problems. So I made
a test program to see if I was using it properly, and it still doesn't work.
The test program is:
#include
#include
#include
#define MAX_STR 100
using namespace std;
typedef unsigned short int usi;
int
atacontrol using
> > > Sil0680 chipset), and was in the process of transfering files from my
> > > old server. However, I'm having an issue with the md5 sum of a file.
> > > Here's my uname -a:
> > >
> > > FreeBSD tigger.weller-fahy.com 5.2.1-RELEA
rom my
> > old server. However, I'm having an issue with the md5 sum of a file.
> > Here's my uname -a:
> >
> > FreeBSD tigger.weller-fahy.com 5.2.1-RELEASE-p11
> > FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE-p11 #0: Thu Oct 14 00:17:32 CEST 2004
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj
On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 06:01:37AM -0800, David J. Weller-Fahy wrote:
> I just installed 5.2.1-RELEASE on a RAID1 setup (atacontrol using
> Sil0680 chipset), and was in the process of transfering files from my
> old server. However, I'm having an issue with the md5 sum of a fil
I just installed 5.2.1-RELEASE on a RAID1 setup (atacontrol using
Sil0680 chipset), and was in the process of transfering files from my
old server. However, I'm having an issue with the md5 sum of a file.
Here's my uname -a:
FreeBSD tigger.weller-fahy.com 5.2.1-RELEASE-p11
FreeBSD 5.2
er a restore from dump level 0 has
> > > occurred?
>
>
>
> Could you use something like tripwire (which does an md5 of each file on the
> filesystem and stores them in a database for later verification)?
>
> I think tripwire only checks executable files, but the ap
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Ruben Bloemgarten wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Does someone know how to reliably run a checksum of sorts on a filesystem,
> to be able
>
> to verify filesystem integrity after a restore from dump level 0 has
> occurred?
Tripwire and its ilk live in the ports system. The base system u
Bill Moran wrote:
Jerry McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,
Does someone know how to reliably run a checksum of sorts on a filesystem,
to be able
to verify filesystem integrity after a restore from dump level 0 has
occurred?
Could you use something like tripwire (which does an
gt; occurred?
Could you use something like tripwire (which does an md5 of each file on the
filesystem and stores them in a database for later verification)?
I think tripwire only checks executable files, but the approach should work
with all files.
--
Bill Mor
>
> Hi all,
>
> Does someone know how to reliably run a checksum of sorts on a filesystem,
> to be able
>
> to verify filesystem integrity after a restore from dump level 0 has
> occurred?
Unless you made a checksum of everything before doing the dump
and made absolutely no changes, there is n
Hi all,
Does someone know how to reliably run a checksum of sorts on a filesystem,
to be able
to verify filesystem integrity after a restore from dump level 0 has
occurred?
Thanks,
Ruben
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.or
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 10:46:21AM +0100, Albert Shih wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I've see long time ago there are some md5 signature in /var/db/pkg/*. I
>
> Do you know some basic command to check this signature with the real binary ?
> For example if I want known when some
Hi,
I've see long time ago there are some md5 signature in /var/db/pkg/*. I
Do you know some basic command to check this signature with the real binary ?
For example if I want known when some user change my /usr/local/bin/bash to
/usr/local/bin/bash-hack
Regards.
--
Albert SHIH
Universi
henko'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: verify md5 for /sbin/init (v1.7.2.3 2002/08/12
> 11:17:37 ) on FreeBSD Stable 4.9
>
>
> Edmund Craske wrote:
>
> >1.2 is not greater than 1.7. Check your logic.
> >
> >
> >
> >>-Original Mess
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.8claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.8)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 17:05:12 +0300
Sergey 'DoubleF' Zaharchenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> probably wrote:
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
