Hello all,
First time on the mailing list, please forgive me if I am missing any
"netiquette". I've been using OpenBSD on my desktop these last few
weeks. I have been trying to solve an issue with Only Firefox causing
stuttering issues with my audio output. Some things I have tried are:
* Settin
On 2022-05-06, Theo Buehler wrote:
> While we could readily make libssl fall back to the legacy stack if
> SSL_OP_NO_TICKET is disabled, I don't think this optimization outweighs
> the overall benefit of TLSv1.3 - better protocol, cleaner code.
Especially when the major beneficiary of this is pkg
On 2022-05-04, nace...@narwhals.org wrote:
> https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=162652200109398&w=2 I disagree.
> while its technically correct with the rfc, in practice, not many OSes
> rigidly enforces not using the router option when 121 is present that
> I've used.
It's not just technicall
On 2022-05-04, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> I have also pointed out a couple of times now that sysclean ignores the
> lessons of "find -print0" and "xargs -0", and I worry it could find a
> file called
>
> "/somewhere/matchingpattern/\n/etc/spwd.db"
Thus is easily fixed by adding a "delete" mode which
On 2022-05-06 08:26 UTC, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2022-05-04, nace...@narwhals.org wrote:
>> https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=162652200109398&w=2 I disagree.
>> while its technically correct with the rfc, in practice, not many OSes
>> rigidly enforces not using the router option when 121
This worked wonderfully - thank you!
On 5/5/22 23:40, kelly wrote:
I had this issue awhile back and was able to resolve it by setting
xrandr --dpi 96. I added it to my xsession.
Not sure if this is a great solution, but it worked for me.
Best,
Kelly
On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 05:00:24PM -0400,
On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 7:18 AM Florian Obser wrote:
> Also, dhcpd(8) does not even hand out option 3 when option 121 is
> configured.
That doesn't seem like correct behavior (the ISC version certainly
offers both). Both options should be sent if configured, it's up to
the client to properly handl
On 2022-05-06 10:28 -04, Sonic wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 7:18 AM Florian Obser wrote:
>> Also, dhcpd(8) does not even hand out option 3 when option 121 is
>> configured.
>
> That doesn't seem like correct behavior (the ISC version certainly
> offers both). Both options should be sent if con
On 5/6/22 9:03 AM, Proton wrote:
Hi,
I'm using softraid 1C on my remote dedicated server, built on two NVMe disks.
It works really well from performance perspective and provide some data
protection,
but there is no way to check device health status because SMART doesn’t work.
I guess bioctl wil
here's a weird one.
HP T430 Thin Client, reloaded with OpenBSD.
In it's intended use, it runs Linux in BIOS boot mode. OpenBSD's
installer will boot that way, but the kernel is unable to see the
16g storage device. In UEFI boot mode, OpenBSD works well,
including running X. This machine has ON
Look, can we all just agree it is just a question of adding appropriate
verbiage to the port/package, sticking a huge CAVEAT on the documentation
leading to it, and go back to writing actual code ?
Hello,
I'm unable to boot into my OpenBSD 7.1 - CURRENT Desktop. I have been using
this desktop without issue since the release of 7.1
Today when booting I see the following message:
OpenBSD 7.1-current (GENERIC.MP) #496: Wed May 4 14:10:06 MDT 2022
dera...@amd64.openbsd.org:/usr/src/sys/
On 2022-05-06 12:00 -04, Nick Holland wrote:
> here's a weird one.
>
> HP T430 Thin Client, reloaded with OpenBSD.
> In it's intended use, it runs Linux in BIOS boot mode. OpenBSD's
> installer will boot that way, but the kernel is unable to see the
> 16g storage device. In UEFI boot mode, OpenB
Florian Obser wrote:
> So, if you end up with a /bsd.upgrade on the running system that is
> still mode 0700, your bootloader is on the fritz.
>
> If you have a /bsd.upgrade that's 0600 your bootloader found the kernel
> and tried to boot it, but the installer didn't get very far.
>
> If there
On 5/6/22 12:48 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Florian Obser wrote:
So, if you end up with a /bsd.upgrade on the running system that is
still mode 0700, your bootloader is on the fritz.
If you have a /bsd.upgrade that's 0600 your bootloader found the kernel
and tried to boot it, but the installer d
On 5/6/22 2:30 PM, Nick Holland wrote:
On 5/6/22 12:48 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Florian Obser wrote:
So, if you end up with a /bsd.upgrade on the running system that is
still mode 0700, your bootloader is on the fritz.
If you have a /bsd.upgrade that's 0600 your bootloader found the kernel
a
16 matches
Mail list logo
