On 11 June 2014 06:59, Jonathan Anderson wrote:
> Dan Lukes wrote:
>> 9.3 can be patched during it's lifetime, but 9.3-pX and 9.3-pY needs to be
>> binary compatible.
>>
>> If it is not compatible, then it's no 9.3 anymore.
>>
>>> One modification I'd be prepared to contemplate is that 1.0.1 (for
On 19/08/06, Pieter de Boer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gang,
For months now, we're all seeing repeated bruteforce attempts on SSH.
I've configured my pf install to ratelimit TCP connections to port 22
and to automatically add IP-addresses that connect too fast to a table
that's filtered:
table
On 23/05/06, Roger Marquis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All that said FreeBSD's ports are still the reference
implementation, head-and-shoulders better than up2date, yum, rpm,
apt-get, or anything else out there.
I guess you haven't looked at OpenBSD's branch of FreeBSD's
pkg_add(1), where they'v
On 19/07/05, Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2005-07-19 11:16, Joachim Str?mbergson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Aloha!
> >
> > (I've Googled around a bit, but failed to find much previous posts about
> > this though I'm sure it has been discussed...)
> >
> > Have anybody (in co
On 25/04/05, Avleen Vig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 03:30:37AM +0200, Danny Pansters wrote:
> > Let me just boldly insert that IMHO, if 6.X is going to become stable this
> > autumn already that indeed 5.4 or maybe 5.5 at least one of those must be
> > long-term-supported.
