On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 11:23:23AM +0300, Kimmo Suominen wrote:
> My thinking here is that it makes it simpler to keep the script in
> sync between branches. (I have not checked, but I guess the sysctl
> does not depend on kernel configuration then.)
In this special case I think this would not be
On Sat, 10 Jun 2023 at 20:08, Martin Husemann wrote:
> I don't like this commit, it mixes:
>
> - several text improvements (good!)
> - one unrelated cosmetic change (rely on all rc.d scripts being installed
>with x bit, so drop the "sh" from the manual invocation)
Calling the rc.d script di
On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 04:02:39AM +, Kimmo Suominen wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: kim
> Date: Sat Jun 10 04:02:39 UTC 2023
>
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: sshd
>
> Log Message:
> Add some backwards compat. Adjust grammar.
>
>
> To generate a diff of this com
On 22-08-24 20:39, Robert Elz wrote:
| Date:Wed, 24 Aug 2022 20:37:54 +1000
| From:Luke Mewburn
| Message-ID:
|
| | I think it would be more consistent with existing convention
| | (in both NetBSD and on other systems) to add /etc/raid.d
|
| I ce
Date:Wed, 24 Aug 2022 20:37:54 +1000
From:Luke Mewburn
Message-ID:
| I think it would be more consistent with existing convention
| (in both NetBSD and on other systems) to add /etc/raid.d
I certainly won't be doing that, I detest the ".d" convention
as a genera
On 22-07-21 07:49, Robert Elz wrote:
| Module Name:src
| Committed By: kre
| Date: Thu Jul 21 07:49:36 UTC 2022
|
| Modified Files:
| src/etc/rc.d: raidframe
|
| Log Message:
| Make this better ... Allow config file for raidN to be found
| in
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 10:11:36AM +, Stephen Borrill wrote:
> In our products, we have a standard rc.conf and then a series of build
> scripts that configure and enable/disable services as required. We can
> switch between npf and ipfilter with a one-line change in a settings file,
> for examp
On 30/11/2021 09:43, Martin Husemann wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 09:10:35AM +, Stephen Borrill wrote:
In rc.conf, npf=YES is sufficient, but you are advocating the setting needs
to be duplicated if put into rc.conf.d.
I think the confusion starts with the idea of enabling NPF by just
pu
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 09:10:35AM +, Stephen Borrill wrote:
> In rc.conf, npf=YES is sufficient, but you are advocating the setting needs
> to be duplicated if put into rc.conf.d.
I think the confusion starts with the idea of enabling NPF by just
putting the NPF=yes into scripts in /etc/rc.co
On 26/11/2021 17:52, Robert Elz wrote:
Date:Fri, 26 Nov 2021 13:11:36 +
From:"Stephen Borrill"
Message-ID: <20211126131136.63fabf...@cvs.netbsd.org>
| Load rc configuration based on rcvar, not name, so that correct settings
| in /etc/rc.conf.d are loade
Date:Fri, 26 Nov 2021 13:11:36 +
From:"Stephen Borrill"
Message-ID: <20211126131136.63fabf...@cvs.netbsd.org>
| Load rc configuration based on rcvar, not name, so that correct settings
| in /etc/rc.conf.d are loaded.
This looks wrong to me (and a pullup reque
Date:Mon, 2 Aug 2021 20:02:28 +0900
From:Rin Okuyama
Message-ID: <21dae7de-f153-2e53-4e66-cc61c8241...@gmail.com>
quoting Michael van Elst:
| > If you insist on a separate barrier, one name would be USERDEVICEPATHS
| > or short UDEV.
UDEV (or UDEVS) sounds good
On 2021/08/02 19:15, Michael van Elst wrote:
On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 11:27:22AM +0200, Michael van Elst wrote:
On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 11:54:27AM +0900, Rin Okuyama wrote:
Hi,
this commit causes:
rcorder: file `/etc/rc.d/devpubd' is before unknown provision `zfs'
for systems with MKZ
On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 11:27:22AM +0200, Michael van Elst wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 11:54:27AM +0900, Rin Okuyama wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > this commit causes:
> >
> > rcorder: file `/etc/rc.d/devpubd' is before unknown provision `zfs'
> >
> > for systems with MKZFS=no.
> >
> > Install
On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 11:54:27AM +0900, Rin Okuyama wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this commit causes:
>
> rcorder: file `/etc/rc.d/devpubd' is before unknown provision `zfs'
>
> for systems with MKZFS=no.
>
> Install /etc/rc.d/zfs for everyone? This should be harmless; the script
> properly checks e
On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 12:44:01PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Mon, 2 Aug 2021 11:54:27 +0900
> From:Rin Okuyama
> Message-ID:
>
> | Install /etc/rc.d/zfs for everyone?
>
> Add a new dummy rc.d script (like LOGIN or DISKS)
> have devpubd come before that, and
Date:Mon, 2 Aug 2021 11:54:27 +0900
From:Rin Okuyama
Message-ID:
| Install /etc/rc.d/zfs for everyone?
Add a new dummy rc.d script (like LOGIN or DISKS)
have devpubd come before that, and everything
which should come later require it.
That's cleaner. We should
Hi,
this commit causes:
rcorder: file `/etc/rc.d/devpubd' is before unknown provision `zfs'
for systems with MKZFS=no.
Install /etc/rc.d/zfs for everyone? This should be harmless; the script
properly checks existence of /sbin/zfs, i.e., MKZFS=yes.
Alternatively, autogen /etc/rc.d/devp
Christos Zoulas wrote:
Module Name:src
Committed By: christos
Date: Mon Apr 9 15:02:39 UTC 2018
Modified Files:
src/etc/rc.d: sshd
Log Message:
Simplify so we don't have to hard-code the key filenames in two places.
There are some leftovers in the script after the si
> Module Name:src
> Committed By: christos
> Date: Sat Apr 7 00:41:16 UTC 2018
>
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: sshd
>
> Log Message:
> support xmss keys
I advise against generating XMSS host keys by default.
The XMSS signature scheme is stateful, so managing XMSS ke
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 08:25:08AM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
> It isn't the precedence of the operators that is at issue, but
> deciding what is an operator -
oh right, I'm pretty sure I knew about that at one point and blocked
it out for the sake of my sanity :-)
--
David A. Holland
dholl...@n
Date:Tue, 5 Dec 2017 16:00:25 +
From:David Holland
Message-ID: <20171205160025.ga22...@netbsd.org>
| Test -o isn't well specified? Or is the issue the precedence of ! vs. -o?
-o is a "to be deprecated one day" option, but that is not really the
problem (our tes
On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 02:50:33PM +, Robert Elz wrote:
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: sshd
>
> Log Message:
> Do away with (not well specified, even if it happens to work) absurd
> 15 arg test ([ ]) expression, and replace it with several well defined
> 2 arg tests, combined wi
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 06:42:26PM +, Alan Barrett wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: apb
> Date: Fri Dec 14 18:42:25 UTC 2012
>
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: random_seed
>
> Log Message:
> Avoid using programs from /usr/bin. This should fix PR 47326.
>
> - no need
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 17:39:42 +0100
Marc Balmer wrote:
>
> Am 04.12.2012 um 17:38 schrieb "Patrick Welche" :
>
> > Module Name:src
> > Committed By: prlw1
> > Date: Tue Dec 4 16:38:40 UTC 2012
> >
> > Modified Files:
> > src/etc/rc.d: ntpd ppp
> >
> > Log Messag
Am 04.12.2012 um 17:38 schrieb "Patrick Welche" :
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: prlw1
> Date: Tue Dec 4 16:38:40 UTC 2012
>
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: ntpd ppp
>
> Log Message:
> Make sure that ntpd creates a pid file for the rc machinery to work.
> http://mail-index
At Sat, 16 Jun 2012 04:17:47 +0200,
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > > > > Ah, you mean it's enough to add
> > > > > >> rcvar=${name}
> > > > > line into rc.d/makemandb instead of checkyesno?
> > > >
> > > > Exactly.
> > >
> > > Is it true?
> > > I could not disable it with this patch (diff from rev
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 10:50:08AM +0900, Tetsuya Isaki wrote:
> At Wed, 13 Jun 2012 11:35:37 +0900,
> Tetsuya Isaki wrote:
> > > > > The rcvar assignment was missing, but shouldn't the normal logic
> > > > > skip calling the start command if the rcvar is not YES?
> > > >
> > > > Ah, you mean it'
At Wed, 13 Jun 2012 11:35:37 +0900,
Tetsuya Isaki wrote:
> > > > The rcvar assignment was missing, but shouldn't the normal logic
> > > > skip calling the start command if the rcvar is not YES?
> > >
> > > Ah, you mean it's enough to add
> > > >> rcvar=${name}
> > > line into rc.d/makemandb inste
At Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:42:59 +0200,
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > > > > > Modified Files:
> > > > > > src/etc/rc.d: makemandb
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Log Message:
> > > > > > Allows you to disable it if makemandb=NO in rc.conf.
> > > > > > Thanks tsutsui@ and Yasushi Oshima.
> > > > >
> > > >
joerg@ wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:59:34PM +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
> > joerg@ wrote:
> >
> > > > Modified Files:
> > > > src/etc/rc.d: makemandb
> > > >
> > > > Log Message:
> > > > Allows you to disable it if makemandb=NO in rc.conf.
> > > > Thanks tsutsui@ and Yasushi Oshim
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:34:49PM +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
> joerg@ wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:59:34PM +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
> > > joerg@ wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Modified Files:
> > > > > src/etc/rc.d: makemandb
> > > > >
> > > > > Log Message:
> > > > > Allows you to
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:59:34PM +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
> joerg@ wrote:
>
> > > Modified Files:
> > > src/etc/rc.d: makemandb
> > >
> > > Log Message:
> > > Allows you to disable it if makemandb=NO in rc.conf.
> > > Thanks tsutsui@ and Yasushi Oshima.
> >
> > Is the manual checkyesno re
joerg@ wrote:
> > Modified Files:
> > src/etc/rc.d: makemandb
> >
> > Log Message:
> > Allows you to disable it if makemandb=NO in rc.conf.
> > Thanks tsutsui@ and Yasushi Oshima.
>
> Is the manual checkyesno really needed?
It's too slow and annoying on non modern x86 machines as fccache.
I
At Tue, 12 Jun 2012 12:54:20 +0200,
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > Module Name:src
> > Committed By: isaki
> > Date: Tue Jun 12 02:25:30 UTC 2012
> >
> > Modified Files:
> > src/etc/rc.d: makemandb
> >
> > Log Message:
> > Allows you to disable it if makemandb=NO in
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 02:25:30AM +, Tetsuya Isaki wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: isaki
> Date: Tue Jun 12 02:25:30 UTC 2012
>
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: makemandb
>
> Log Message:
> Allows you to disable it if makemandb=NO in rc.conf.
> Thanks tsutsui@ and Y
On Sun, Jan 09, 2011 at 02:47:27AM +, David Holland wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 11:49:54PM +, Matthias Scheler wrote:
> > > This is no longer true, for lvm and other things, so let's take a deep
> > > breath and move chown.
> >
> > Yes, but we should probably provide a symlink fro
On Sat, 8 Jan 2011, David Holland wrote:
> XXX. Why is chown in /usr/sbin ? it should be moved to /sbin
Because historically nothing needed to be chowned during boot because
it was all root.
This is no longer true, for lvm and other things, so let's take a deep
breath and move chown. I don't li
On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 11:49:54PM +, Matthias Scheler wrote:
> > This is no longer true, for lvm and other things, so let's take a deep
> > breath and move chown.
>
> Yes, but we should probably provide a symlink from
> "/usr/sbin/chown" to "/sbin/chown" for backwards compatibility
> re
On 8 Jan 2011, at 23:21, David Holland wrote:
> This is no longer true, for lvm and other things, so let's take a deep
> breath and move chown.
Yes, but we should probably provide a symlink from "/usr/sbin/chown" to
"/sbin/chown" for backwards compatibility reasons.
> I don't like the idea of h
On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 04:16:52PM +, Adam Hamsik wrote:
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: mountcritlocal
>
> Log Message:
> Use /rescue/chown not chown from /usr/sbin which might not be available in
> time of running this script.
>
> XXX. Why is chown in /usr/sbin ? it should be
Am 16.02.10 03:46, schrieb matthew green:
Module Name:src
Committed By: mrg
Date: Tue Feb 16 02:46:02 UTC 2010
Modified Files:
src/etc/rc.d: fsck_root
Log Message:
only fsck / if we find it in /etc/fstab. diskless systems don't need
a / entry.
XXX: still get an error f
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, matthew green wrote:
> Modified Files:
>src/etc/rc.d: fsck_root
>
> Log Message:
> only fsck / if we find it in /etc/fstab. diskless systems don't need
> a / entry.
This seems reasonable. But, without this patch, would it work to
place "fr
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, matthew green wrote:
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: fsck_root
>
> Log Message:
> only fsck / if we find it in /etc/fstab. diskless systems don't need
> a / entry.
This seems reasonable. But, without this patch, would it work to
place "from_mount" in the fs_spec col
Date:Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:28:01 -0500
From:Elad Efrat
Message-ID: <4b3a6651.2080...@netbsd.org>
| This makes 3 or 4 different opinions as to how the message read.
| You will not hear any objections from me if you change it...
I don't care what the message says, bu
Am 29.12.2009 um 21:29 schrieb Elad Efrat:
> Elad Efrat wrote:
>> Marc Balmer wrote:
-osecurelevel=$(sysctl -n kern.securelevel)
+osecurelevel=$(sysctl -n kern.securelevel 2>&-)
+if [ $? != 0 ]; then
+echo "Can't set securelevel. (kern.securelevel sysctl no
Elad Efrat wrote:
Marc Balmer wrote:
-osecurelevel=$(sysctl -n kern.securelevel)
+osecurelevel=$(sysctl -n kern.securelevel 2>&-)
+if [ $? != 0 ]; then
+echo "Can't set securelevel. (kern.securelevel sysctl not
present.)"
the error message should probably read
Can't set
Marc Balmer wrote:
-osecurelevel=$(sysctl -n kern.securelevel)
+osecurelevel=$(sysctl -n kern.securelevel 2>&-)
+if [ $? != 0 ]; then
+echo "Can't set securelevel. (kern.securelevel sysctl not
present.)"
the error message should probably read
Can't set securelevel. (kern.
Am 29.12.2009 um 18:06 schrieb Elad Efrat:
Module Name:src
Committed By: elad
Date: Tue Dec 29 17:06:11 UTC 2009
Modified Files:
src/etc/rc.d: securelevel
Log Message:
Securelevel might not be present, properly complain instead of
printing
error messages from sysctl
On Oct 6, 2009, at 1:22 AM, Adam Hamsik wrote:
> Hi,
> On Oct,Tuesday 6 2009, at 9:03 AM, Alan Barrett wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009, Adam Hamsik wrote:
>>> Modified Files:
>>> src/etc/rc.d: mountall
>>>
>>> Log Message:
>>> Add support for mounting zfs filesystems to mountall script. ZFS
Hi,
On Oct,Tuesday 6 2009, at 9:03 AM, Alan Barrett wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2009, Adam Hamsik wrote:
Modified Files:
src/etc/rc.d: mountall
Log Message:
Add support for mounting zfs filesystems to mountall script. ZFS
configuration
is stored in /etc/zpool.cache and it is automatically
On Mon, 05 Oct 2009, Adam Hamsik wrote:
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: mountall
>
> Log Message:
> Add support for mounting zfs filesystems to mountall script. ZFS configuration
> is stored in /etc/zpool.cache and it is automatically loaded to kernel from
> filesystem. Filesystems are the
matthew green wrote:
>On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Erik Fair wrote:
>> On Sep 8, 2009, at 01:56, Christoph Egger wrote:
>> >Modified Files:
>> > src/etc/rc.d: network
>> >
>> >Log Message:
>> >Do not flush routes if root file system is nfs mounted.
christoph_eg...@gmx.de wrote:
> recent history has shown that patches got discussed after commit
> not before.
The history has also shown you put too much botches ;-p
---
Izumi Tsutsui
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 11:26:54PM +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
> matthew green wrote:
> >On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Erik Fair wrote:
> >> On Sep 8, 2009, at 01:56, Christoph Egger wrote:
> >> >Modified Files:
> >> > src/etc/rc.d: network
> >> >
> >> >Log Message:
> >> >
matthew green wrote:
>On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Erik Fair wrote:
>> On Sep 8, 2009, at 01:56, Christoph Egger wrote:
>> >Modified Files:
>> >src/etc/rc.d: network
>> >
>> >Log Message:
>> >Do not flush routes if root file system is nfs mounted.
>> >Fixes boot prob
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Erik Fair wrote:
> On Sep 8, 2009, at 01:56, Christoph Egger wrote:
> >Modified Files:
> > src/etc/rc.d: network
> >
> >Log Message:
> >Do not flush routes if root file system is nfs mounted.
> >Fixes boot problem when the nfs server is in a different
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Erik Fair wrote:
> > On Sep 8, 2009, at 01:56, Christoph Egger wrote:
> > >Modified Files:
> > > src/etc/rc.d: network
> > >
> > >Log Message:
> > >Do not flush routes if root file system is nfs mounted.
> > >Fixes boot problem when the nfs server is in a different
> > >su
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Erik Fair wrote:
> On Sep 8, 2009, at 01:56, Christoph Egger wrote:
> >Modified Files:
> > src/etc/rc.d: network
> >
> >Log Message:
> >Do not flush routes if root file system is nfs mounted.
> >Fixes boot problem when the nfs server is in a different subnet.
>
> This chan
On Sep 8, 2009, at 01:56, Christoph Egger wrote:
Module Name:src
Committed By: cegger
Date: Tue Sep 8 08:56:34 UTC 2009
Modified Files:
src/etc/rc.d: network
Log Message:
Do not flush routes if root file system is nfs mounted.
Fixes boot problem when the nfs server is
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 06:07:57PM +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
> Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 02:30:56PM +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
> >>> Perhaps a better test would be that dhcpcd shouldn't touch
> >>> the default route unless the default route is through the
> >>> in
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 02:30:56PM +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
>>> Perhaps a better test would be that dhcpcd shouldn't touch
>>> the default route unless the default route is through the
>>> interface that dhcpcd is managing.
>> I agree.
>> How should dhcpcd deal with
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 02:30:56PM +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
> > Perhaps a better test would be that dhcpcd shouldn't touch
> > the default route unless the default route is through the
> > interface that dhcpcd is managing.
>
> I agree.
> How should dhcpcd deal with /etc/resolv.conf ?
> If dh
> On Tue, 08 Sep 2009, Christoph Egger wrote:
> > > > Do not flush routes if root file system is nfs mounted.
> > > > Fixes boot problem when the nfs server is in a different
> > > > subnet.
> > >
> > > Why do you need this special case code, when a simple
> > > flushroutes=NO in /etc/rc.conf wil
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009, Christoph Egger wrote:
> > > Do not flush routes if root file system is nfs mounted.
> > > Fixes boot problem when the nfs server is in a different
> > > subnet.
> >
> > Why do you need this special case code, when a simple
> > flushroutes=NO in /etc/rc.conf will do the job?
>
> On Tue, 08 Sep 2009, Christoph Egger wrote:
> > Modified Files:
> > src/etc/rc.d: network
> >
> > Log Message:
> > Do not flush routes if root file system is nfs mounted.
> > Fixes boot problem when the nfs server is in a different
> > subnet.
>
> Why do you need this special case code, wh
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009, Christoph Egger wrote:
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: network
>
> Log Message:
> Do not flush routes if root file system is nfs mounted.
> Fixes boot problem when the nfs server is in a different subnet.
Why do you need this special case code, when a simple flushrout
Hi,
I am only intermittently online - thus no reply for so long time.
burst is not nice to use (sends always 8 pkts at 0.5 pkt/sec per query)
- iburst (fast resending 0.5 pkt/sec when the filter is empty) is the
better choice - it is perfect for startup and recovery.
Synchronisation takes abou
i...@bsdimp.com said:
> With ntpd -g, it means that time will be messed up until the time is
> first set (which isn't after the first measurement). There are
> several polling intervals, about a minute apart, that have to happen
> before ntpd believes the time
There is some "burst" option which
In message: <87y6px9cr9@snark.cb.piermont.com>
"Perry E. Metzger" writes:
:
: "M. Warner Losh" writes:
: > In message: <87ab2dat79@snark.cb.piermont.com>
: > "Perry E. Metzger" writes:
: > :
: > : Frank Kardel writes:
: > : > Actually we can retire ntpdate in r
On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 10:54:34AM -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>
> Frank Kardel writes:
> > Actually we can retire ntpdate in rc unless we are very tight on
> > memory. ntpd_flags should add the -g flag. This allows for a big
> > (time setting) initial (and only one time) step in ntpd.
>
>
"M. Warner Losh" writes:
> In message: <87ab2dat79@snark.cb.piermont.com>
> "Perry E. Metzger" writes:
> :
> : Frank Kardel writes:
> : > Actually we can retire ntpdate in rc unless we are very tight on
> : > memory. ntpd_flags should add the -g flag. This allows for a big
>
Marc Balmer writes:
>> Frank Kardel writes:
>>> Actually we can retire ntpdate in rc unless we are very tight on
>>> memory. ntpd_flags should add the -g flag. This allows for a big
>>> (time setting) initial (and only one time) step in ntpd.
>>
>> I was made aware of that a few days ago.
>>
>
Am 06.08.2009 um 17:08 schrieb Marc Balmer:
Am 06.08.2009 um 16:54 schrieb Perry E. Metzger:
Frank Kardel writes:
Actually we can retire ntpdate in rc unless we are very tight on
memory. ntpd_flags should add the -g flag. This allows for a big
(time setting) initial (and only one time)
In message: <87ab2dat79@snark.cb.piermont.com>
"Perry E. Metzger" writes:
:
: Frank Kardel writes:
: > Actually we can retire ntpdate in rc unless we are very tight on
: > memory. ntpd_flags should add the -g flag. This allows for a big
: > (time setting) initial (and only one
Am 06.08.2009 um 16:54 schrieb Perry E. Metzger:
Frank Kardel writes:
Actually we can retire ntpdate in rc unless we are very tight on
memory. ntpd_flags should add the -g flag. This allows for a big
(time setting) initial (and only one time) step in ntpd.
I was made aware of that a few
Frank Kardel writes:
> Actually we can retire ntpdate in rc unless we are very tight on
> memory. ntpd_flags should add the -g flag. This allows for a big
> (time setting) initial (and only one time) step in ntpd.
I was made aware of that a few days ago.
If we go that route, however, we will
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 05:06:05PM -0700, Jason Thorpe wrote:
> Definitely not perfect .. named might also depend on ntp (by way of kdc)
> if GSS-TSIG is enabled.
>
> Explicit dependencies are the pits. Launch on demand is the way to go.
So a circular dependency leads to an infinite loop? No tha
Hello Perry !
Actually we can retire ntpdate in rc unless we are very tight on memory.
ntpd_flags should add the -g flag. This allows for a big (time
setting) initial (and only one time) step in ntpd. This is the ntpdate
functionality with ntpd normally continuing afterwards. ntpd is fine
w
On Aug 3, 2009, at 10:45 AM, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Module Name:src
Committed By: perry
Date: Mon Aug 3 17:45:48 UTC 2009
Modified Files:
src/etc/rc.d: named ntpdate
Log Message:
ntpdate can't work without named because a modern ntp.conf has dns
names in it. We there
David Holland wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 03:33:36PM +, Roy Marples wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: roy
> Date: Thu May 14 15:33:36 UTC 2009
>
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: network
>
> Log Message:
> Only start dhcpcd per interface if not r
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 03:33:36PM +, Roy Marples wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By:roy
> Date:Thu May 14 15:33:36 UTC 2009
>
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: network
>
> Log Message:
> Only start dhcpcd per interface if not running the full dhcpc
In article <87k55c4jkd@snark.cb.piermont.com>,
Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>
>Christos Zoulas writes:
>> Module Name: src
>> Committed By:christos
>> Date:Wed Apr 22 18:27:03 UTC 2009
>>
>> Modified Files:
>> src/etc/rc.d: named
>>
>> Log Message:
>> Adjust for new de
Christos Zoulas writes:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: christos
> Date: Wed Apr 22 18:27:03 UTC 2009
>
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: named
>
> Log Message:
> Adjust for new default location of the pid file.
Seems kind of weird to have stuff in /var/run/named/named.pid -- w
On Apr,Tuesday 21 2009, at 5:46 PM, Paul Goyette wrote:
It started for me on Saturday, when I updated from 5.99.8 to 5.99.11
This should be fixed now.
Regards
Adam.
It started for me on Saturday, when I updated from 5.99.8 to 5.99.11
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Thomas Klausner wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 06:48:15PM +, Adam Hamsik wrote:
Module Name:src
Committed By: haad
Date: Mon Apr 13 18:48:15 UTC 2009
Modified Files:
src/etc/r
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 06:48:15PM +, Adam Hamsik wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: haad
> Date: Mon Apr 13 18:48:15 UTC 2009
>
> Modified Files:
> src/etc/rc.d: lvm
>
> Log Message:
> We need writable /dev to get lvm working otherwise lvm devices can't be
> created.
87 matches
Mail list logo
