On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 10:36:08PM +0200, Maurice Janssen wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 1, 2007 at 00:04:06 +0200, Joachim Schipper wrote:
> >This is just an idea, and might well be completely retarded/wrong, but:
> >
> >Unless I am mistaken, the reason that compiling the same binary twice
> >yields di
On Tuesday, May 1, 2007 at 00:04:06 +0200, Joachim Schipper wrote:
>This is just an idea, and might well be completely retarded/wrong, but:
>
>Unless I am mistaken, the reason that compiling the same binary twice
>yields different results is that gcc adds some randomness (barring
>special circumst
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Artur Grabowski wrote:
>
> Simple, I trust the people I drink beer with.
Do they have to be drinking beer too? :)
--
[100~Plax]sb16i0A2172656B63616820636420726568746F6E61207473754A[dZ1!=b]salax
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 04:21:34PM +0200, Maurice Janssen wrote:
> On Sunday, April 29, 2007 at 02:35:06 +0100, mal content wrote:
> >I'm extremely interested in binary updates as I don't yet have the resources
> >to put together a build server and compiling updates in qemu is very
> >painful.
> >
On Sunday, April 29, 2007 at 02:35:06 +0100, mal content wrote:
>I'm extremely interested in binary updates as I don't yet have the resources
>to put together a build server and compiling updates in qemu is very
>painful.
>
>Until these binaries are trusted by the OpenBSD project though (which is
On Sunday, April 29, 2007 at 09:06:28 +0200, Johan Linner wrote:
>A great initiative!
>I have tried the i386 stable-build and it is working as expected.
>I will definately have use for your work, can't wait for the first patch
>to the 4.1 release ;)
Thanks for the feedback. Nice to know that at
"mal content" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > trust
>
> On a related note, what is the OpenBSD project's criteria for "trust"
> in matters such as this?
Simple, I trust the people I drink beer with.
//art
trust
On a related note, what is the OpenBSD project's criteria for "trust"
in matters such as this?
MC
On 28/04/07, Maurice Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thursday, April 19, 2007 at 23:45:51 +0200, Maurice Janssen wrote:
>Some progress was made in the last couple of days. First results are up
>at ftp://ftp.su.se/pub/mirrors/openbsd_stable/
>
>I hope to add amd64, alpha and hppa in the nea
Maurice Janssen skrev:
On Thursday, April 19, 2007 at 23:45:51 +0200, Maurice Janssen wrote:
Some progress was made in the last couple of days. First results are up
at ftp://ftp.su.se/pub/mirrors/openbsd_stable/
I hope to add amd64, alpha and hppa in the near future. I don't have
the hardware
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 02:35:06 +0100
"mal content" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 28/04/07, Maurice Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thursday, April 19, 2007 at 23:45:51 +0200, Maurice Janssen wrote:
> > >Some progress was made in the last couple of days. First results are up
> > >at ftp:
On 28/04/07, Maurice Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thursday, April 19, 2007 at 23:45:51 +0200, Maurice Janssen wrote:
>Some progress was made in the last couple of days. First results are up
>at ftp://ftp.su.se/pub/mirrors/openbsd_stable/
>
>I hope to add amd64, alpha and hppa in the nea
On Thursday, April 19, 2007 at 23:45:51 +0200, Maurice Janssen wrote:
>Some progress was made in the last couple of days. First results are up
>at ftp://ftp.su.se/pub/mirrors/openbsd_stable/
>
>I hope to add amd64, alpha and hppa in the near future. I don't have
>the hardware to build other archi
On Tuesday, April 10, 2007 at 01:43:56 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Hi all.
>
>I have noticed that the OpenBSD team puts a lot of emphasis on using binary
>packets rather than building from ports, which I think IMHO is good, but why
>is it that there is no binary kernel updates, rather than pat
On Apr 16, 2007, at 3:51 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2007/04/15 03:41, Bryan Vyhmeister wrote:
(As an aside, how often do you update your -current systems
varies; main desktop/laptop and any boxes I use when I'm working
on anything to do with ports, fairly often.
other machines - generall
On 2007/04/15 03:41, Bryan Vyhmeister wrote:
> (As an aside, how often do you update your -current systems
varies; main desktop/laptop and any boxes I use when I'm working
on anything to do with ports, fairly often.
other machines - generally when there's a fix that I want or when
there's somethi
On Apr 15, 2007, at 3:09 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2007/04/15 02:37, Bryan Vyhmeister wrote:
The original poster seemed to be asking more about an incremental
update system. Maybe that's the wrong term but something along the
lines of the name-your-favorite-linux-distribution setup. An exa
On Apr 15, 2007, at 3:05 AM, Marc Balmer wrote:
Bryan Vyhmeister wrote:
I just skimmed this whole thread and I am wondering about a couple
of things. It appears that all of you are talking about basically
following the instructions for release(8) and just providing the
generated files for
On 2007/04/15 02:37, Bryan Vyhmeister wrote:
> The original poster seemed to be asking more about an incremental
> update system. Maybe that's the wrong term but something along the
> lines of the name-your-favorite-linux-distribution setup. An example
> might be yum in CentOS (and others) or
Bryan Vyhmeister wrote:
I just skimmed this whole thread and I am wondering about a couple of
things. It appears that all of you are talking about basically following
the instructions for release(8) and just providing the generated files
for people. Is that correct?
That is not enough. You
I just skimmed this whole thread and I am wondering about a couple of
things. It appears that all of you are talking about basically
following the instructions for release(8) and just providing the
generated files for people. Is that correct?
If the above is true, I can also assist with bui
On Saturday, April 14, 2007 at 07:43:06 +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
>My company has to provide -stable base system and especially packages on
>at least i386 for it's customers. We have a fan-out box to which
>customer systems connect (the PKG_PATH points to it). This works really
>nice an we can
On Friday, April 13, 2007 at 17:21:14 -0400, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
>Maurice Janssen wrote:
>>On Friday, April 13, 2007 at 15:16:41 -0400, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
>>>If there was a real concrete effort, not just the usual vapor ware, I
>>>would/could offer hosting in Equinix peering point, for downlo
Maurice Janssen wrote:
On Tuesday, April 10, 2007 at 11:36:08 +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
We have stated this numerous times, but maybe it's not easy to find in the
archives because there is no obvious subject: not enough resources.
Binary updates for the whole system would be desireable, but we s
On 13/04/07, Daniel Ouellet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Maurice Janssen wrote:
> On Friday, April 13, 2007 at 15:16:41 -0400, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
>> If there was a real concrete effort, not just the usual vapor ware, I
>> would/could offer hosting in Equinix peering point, for downloading
>> bin
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 15:16:41 -0400
Daniel Ouellet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not to put the burning on anyone here, but if that was going to be done,
> I would love to be sure it is done properly, meaning with some guidance
> of devs to follow the same standard as the project if possible.
Any
Maurice Janssen wrote:
On Friday, April 13, 2007 at 15:16:41 -0400, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
If there was a real concrete effort, not just the usual vapor ware, I
would/could offer hosting in Equinix peering point, for downloading
binaries,
That's in the US? Is that OK with regard to export res
On Friday, April 13, 2007 at 15:16:41 -0400, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
>If there was a real concrete effort, not just the usual vapor ware, I
>would/could offer hosting in Equinix peering point, for downloading
>binaries,
That's in the US? Is that OK with regard to export restrictions?
>Not to put
Maurice Janssen wrote:
On Tuesday, April 10, 2007 at 11:36:08 +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
We have stated this numerous times, but maybe it's not easy to find in the
archives because there is no obvious subject: not enough resources.
Binary updates for the whole system would be desireable, but we si
On Tuesday, April 10, 2007 at 11:36:08 +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
>We have stated this numerous times, but maybe it's not easy to find in the
>archives because there is no obvious subject: not enough resources.
>Binary updates for the whole system would be desireable, but we simply do
>not have the t
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 01:43:56 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks to all for the kind and enlightening answers. When I read that it was
mainly due to lack of people and so, and not because that it was a bad idea, I
then hope OpenBSD will keep expanding, and one day have all the resources which
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 01:43:56AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I have noticed that the OpenBSD team puts a lot of emphasis on using binary
> packets rather than building from ports, which I think IMHO is good, but why
> is it that there is no binary kernel updates, rather than pa
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 01:43:56AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have noticed that the OpenBSD team puts a lot of emphasis on
> using binary packets rather than building from ports, which I
> think IMHO is good, but why is it that there is no binary kernel
> updates, rather than patching the
Hi,
Try this URL:
http://www.google.nl/search?q=openbsd+binary+upgrade
# Han
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OpenBSD has really made a cool solution with pkg_add -u, but why not kernel
and basesystem binary updates as well?
You can do binary updates. On your build machine just update to -stable
and do make release, then upgrade your machines.
Hi all.
I have noticed that the OpenBSD team puts a lot of emphasis on using binary
packets rather than building from ports, which I think IMHO is good, but why
is it that there is no binary kernel updates, rather than patching the kernel
from source?
I am asking this not from a point that we fin
36 matches
Mail list logo
