Re: remove twm(1) from xenocara ?

I think cwm works fine for that and it is still there. Den mån 18 juli 2022 08:39Alessandro De Laurenzis skrev: > This is just the perspective of a user (even less: my _personal_ > perspective). > > Removing twm would be a mistake in my opinion. It is still pretty > functional and, when correctl

pipex(4): kill "Static" keyword

We don't use "static" keyword for functions declaration to allow ddb(4) debug. Also, many "Static" functions are called by pppx(4) layer outside pipex(4) layer. This is the mostly mechanic diff, except the `pipex_pppoe_padding' which should be "static const". Index: sys/net/pipex.c ==

Re: ampintc: minor nits

On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 06:58:33PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 16:21:39 +0200 > > From: Anton Lindqvist > > > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 09:02:20AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > > > Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 08:35:44 +0200 > > > > From: Anton Lindqvist > > > > > > > > H

pppac(4): don't grab netlock within pppacioctl()

pipex(4) doesn't rely on netlock anymore. Index: sys/net/if_pppx.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/net/if_pppx.c,v retrieving revision 1.119 diff -u -p -r1.119 if_pppx.c --- sys/net/if_pppx.c 15 Jul 2022 22:56:13 - 1.119 +++ sys

bgpd less chatter on rde exit

Noticed the other day, when the RDE dies the session engine may log the "Can't send message %u to RDE, ctl pipe closed" multiple times because the queue is still processed. Since this error only happens after a "SE: Lost connection to RDE" error it does not anything to the crash log. This is why t

Re: bgpd less chatter on rde exit

On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 03:46:05PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote: > Noticed the other day, when the RDE dies the session engine may log the > "Can't send message %u to RDE, ctl pipe closed" multiple times because > the queue is still processed. > > Since this error only happens after a "SE: Lost conn

Remove support for CH and HS classes from dig(1)

Hi, I'm too young to ever know there were other types of networks still supported by dig(1), but it seems it's a thing. Found while reading [0]. Realistically speaking do we want to keep supporting these kind of ancient networks on our version? Is there still someone out there using them? [0] ht

Re: Remove support for CH and HS classes from dig(1)

On 2022-07-18 14:52 +01, Ricardo Mestre wrote: > Hi, > > I'm too young to ever know there were other types of networks still supported > by > dig(1), but it seems it's a thing. Found while reading [0]. > > Realistically speaking do we want to keep supporting these kind of ancient > networks on ou

Re: Remove support for CH and HS classes from dig(1)

sure you do! otherwise I figure you'd have removed it already :) dropping the diff. On 17:08 Mon 18 Jul , Florian Obser wrote: > yes, I use it daily. > > $ dig @k.root-servers.net +norec +noall +answer hostname.bind ch txt > hostname.bind.0 CH TXT "ns1.ch-gva.k

Re: gzip: fix pledge violation

Bump.

Re: remove twm(1) from xenocara ?

I use it, have used it, and will continue to use it full time. It is simple, low resource use and works on any system I have. I don't need any more functionality in a window manager. Anything else can be added on. The argument presented is something like "why would anyone want to do that". geoff

Re: remove twm(1) from xenocara ?

On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 10:38:53AM +0200, Matthieu Herrb wrote: > Hi, > > twm(1) is the original X11R5 window manager. It has not been update to > support any of the extended window manager hints and still only knows > how to handle the legacy bitmapped fonts rendered by the X server. > > In port