Hello,
I'm trying to replace two cisco routers by two openBGPd routers.
A have 3 neighbors, two with 4-bytes AS, and one which only supports
2-bytes AS for now.
I have a 4-bytes AS too.
So in my bgpd.conf, I have :
...
AS
network z.z.z.z/21
...
neighbor #a neighbor which supports 4 bytes
Does someone have compiled i386 package for current nut?
https://github.com/networkupstools/nut
Or walkthrough how to build it on 5.3.
The reason for install development version it's added
Riello UPS support.
This is my step:
# git clone https://github.com/networkupstools/nut.git
# pkg_add python-
On 29 July 2013 10:19, lilit-aibolit wrote:
> Does someone have compiled i386 package for current nut?
> https://github.com/networkupstools/nut
> Or walkthrough how to build it on 5.3.
> The reason for install development version it's added
> Riello UPS support.
> This is my step:
> # git clone ht
On 07/29/2013 11:31 AM, Marios Makassikis wrote:
ln -s /usr/local/bin/python3.2 /usr/local/bin/python
Thanks. It helped a bit, but now
# rm /usr/local/bin/python
# ln -s /usr/local/bin/python2.7 /usr/local/bin/python
# pwd
/root/nut
# export AUTOMAKE_VERSION=1.13.1
# export AUTOCONF_VERSION=2.6
On 07/29/2013 12:13 PM, lilit-aibolit wrote:
On 07/29/2013 11:31 AM, Marios Makassikis wrote:
ln -s /usr/local/bin/python3.2 /usr/local/bin/python
Thanks. It helped a bit, but now
# rm /usr/local/bin/python
# ln -s /usr/local/bin/python2.7 /usr/local/bin/python
# pwd
/root/nut
# export AUTOMAK
Hello,
I'm upgrading our firewalls to OpenBSD 5.3 (with erratas) from 5.1 :
As far I can see now, the firewall (without any problem) starts with a
carp demote count = "33". On 5.1 the demote count was = 0
looks like the "33" comes with a pfsync bulk start
Jul 29 13:51:01 ucop2 /bsd: carp: pfsync
Kerberos is disabled per default in SSH now?
Revision 1.60: download - view: text, markup, annotated - select for diffs
Wed Jun 19 05:27:06 2013 UTC (5 weeks, 5 days ago) by deraadt
Branches: MAIN
Diff to: previous 1.59: preferred, coloured
Changes since revision 1.59: +2 -1 lines
stop doing kerb
Still working on my problem.
When doing a tcpdumpc apture of bgp UPDATE messages sent to neighbor 2
(2-bytes AS), I still have
/Update Message (2), length: 54//
// Origin (1), length: 1, Flags [T]: IGP//
//0x: 00//
// AS Path (2), length: 4, Flags [T]: *23456 *
Hello @misc,
I am yet another interested in provided OpenBSD defaults. More
specifically the XTerm and GCC. Apparently there are better alternatives
like:
URXVT
* The code base is half the size of XTerm's
* Consumes 25% less memory
* Can be daemonized
* Much better handling of different fonts an
h...@riseup.net [h...@riseup.net] wrote:
>
> On the other hand XTerm is an old code and memory hog that relies on X
> toolkit and supports features you'll find nowhere thus will never need
> (like Tektronix).
>
Xenocara is the classic X tree, as much as possible. Any replacement for
xterm needs
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:18 PM, wrote:
> Hello @misc,
>
> I am yet another interested in provided OpenBSD defaults. More
> specifically the XTerm and GCC. Apparently there are better alternatives
> like:
>
> URXVT
>
> * The code base is half the size of XTerm's
> * Consumes 25% less memory
> * C
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 11:57:42 -0700, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
> h...@riseup.net [h...@riseup.net] wrote:
> >
> > On the other hand XTerm is an old code and memory hog that relies on X
> > toolkit and supports features you'll find nowhere thus will never need
> > (like Tektronix).
> >
>
> Xenocara i
Pascal Stumpf [pascal.stu...@cubes.de] wrote:
> >
> > Replacing GCC is no trivial task, but Bitrig already did it.
>
> "Did it" aka "now rely on packages to build base, some of them with a
> non-free license".
>
Well they are working on a BSD-licensed toolchain, with mcpp, elftoolchain,
libc++
> both of which are more or less crappy xterm (not vt100, not vt220) emulators
The fact that they consume less, work faster, have clean and actually readable
code
which you can hack through without symptoms of nausea -- all these make tham
crappier than
the xterm?! All the cars in the world more
> > both of which are more or less crappy xterm (not vt100, not vt220) emulators
> The fact that they consume less, work faster, have clean and actually
> readable code
>
> which you can hack through without symptoms of nausea -- all these
> make tham crappier than the xterm?! All the cars in the
Theo, I do NOT even try to "recommend" you or any other OpenBSD devs or
actually anyone
reading this mail the one true way of solving the problems. Don't do any
advocacy, even
though it may look like that I do. And of course you are perfectly right that
there are no
diffs in mail. The sole pupr
El 29-07-2013 14:57, Chris Cappuccio escribió:
h...@riseup.net [h...@riseup.net] wrote:
LLVM/Clang
Replacing GCC is no trivial task, but Bitrig already did it. And they
don't support most of the platforms that OpenBSD does. LLVM doesn't either.
Frankly, if you want to play with OpenBSD com
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:31 PM, deoxyt2 wrote:
> Respect to replace GCC by LLVM/Clang, I think there is already something
> advanced with PCC project.
PCC was advanced into the attic over a year ago:
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=133423160431049&w=2
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 09:33:55AM +0200, OCEANET - Cédric BASSAGET wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to replace two cisco routers by two openBGPd routers.
> A have 3 neighbors, two with 4-bytes AS, and one which only supports
> 2-bytes AS for now.
> I have a 4-bytes AS too.
>
> So in my bgpd.conf,
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:03:42AM +0400, h...@riseup.net wrote:
> [...]
> Like Clang for i386/amd64 guys with all the new and fancy and then make a
> balanced
> transition slowly phasing out aging architectures?
First you do not get project's goals, see the website.
jirib
20 matches
Mail list logo
