Hi all,
if I put command like system(/usr/local/bin/radacct) in logout.c
everything goes normal but _if_ user logout normally that is, at prompt user
type logout
the problem is when user login using ssh and connection terminated by
accident such as the client hang and have reboot, utmp wasn't
This may not be a good idea. I often check daily reports to see if
a disk has suddenly filled or had been gradually filling over a
long period of time - you wouldn't be able to get this info if you
print stuff selectively.
in the case of df, one could set whether you want full df status OR
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999 13:13:14 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
The -n option will imply -l, but -o will be a no-op unless at least one
of -n and -l is specified. Manpage changes will be included in the deal.
The diff for this change is available from:
While going through old cvs commit log, I spotted this:
Index: param.h
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/sys/param.h,v
retrieving revision 1.50
diff -u -r1.50 param.h
--- param.h 1999/06/20 08:34:24 1.50
+++ param.h
gurne...@efn.org (John-Mark Gurney) writes:
Christopher Seiwald scribbled this message on Aug 18:
It's a pretty straightforward change to bypass the insertion sort for
large subsets of the data. If no one has a strong love for qsort, I'll
educate myself on how to make and contribute this
What would be the right releasetag to use in order to build
a 3.2-STABLE 'release' (make release)? Would that be RELENG_3 ?
From looking at 'cvs log Makefile' in the top of the source tree
I get:
symbolic names:
RELENG_3_2_PAO: 1.222.2.4.0.2
RELENG_3_2_PAO_BP: 1.222.2.4
g...@lemis.com (Greg Lehey) writes:
Again, if we have two concurrent transactions, we stand to gain money:
the updated balance is likely not to know about the other transaction,
and will thus forget one of the deductions.
Now I suppose you're going to come and say that this is bad
On 23 Aug 1999, Ville-Pertti Keinonen wrote:
g...@lemis.com (Greg Lehey) writes:
Again, if we have two concurrent transactions, we stand to gain money:
the updated balance is likely not to know about the other transaction,
and will thus forget one of the deductions.
Now I suppose
Hi,
A friend (Juha) has written a new device driver for another
batch of video capture cards from LifeVide, Genoa and ATIech
which use the Zoran and Philips SAA chipset.
The driver is likely to be called ztv
If I add this to FreeBSD, where is the best place
Keep it in /usr/src/sys/pci
Or add
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Cillian Sharkey wrote:
Keeping records would be handy alright..but cutting out all
the everything is ok msgs would reduce reading time..having
an option for full report OR just the important results should satisfy
everyone..
What I do run things through a filter that
While looking at the FIFO implementation, I understand that a FIFO is
implemented as a socket. But I am not sure where the data in a FIFO
is stored (mbuf or filesystem buf structure?) and how it manages the
red/write pointers. Can anyone give me a general picture of this?
Any help is
I heard a rumor that freebsd runs on a sparc, but I dont see any backing
for that. Is it in the works?
dennis
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Wilko Bulte wrote:
What would be the right releasetag to use in order to build
a 3.2-STABLE 'release' (make release)? Would that be RELENG_3 ?
Yes. Though RELENG_3 is a branch tag.
RELENG_3_2_PAO: 1.222.2.4.0.2
RELENG_3_2_PAO_BP: 1.222.2.4
Wes Peters wrote:
[...]
Thanks to everyone who responded, and for the politeness of the responses in
the face of the stupidity of the original question.
People are usually more polite when they are, err, having fun. ;-
--
Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS)
d...@newsguy.com
Greg Lehey wrote:
all done in the kernel anyway. In userland, we'd use a different
example:
I make a number of financial transactions over the Internet. In
each case, the system checks my account balance, transfers the money
and deducts it from my account:
1. Check balance.
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On 23-Aug-99 Greg Lehey wrote:
I'm a little surprised that there's any objection to the concept of
mandatory locking. In transaction processing, locking is not
optional, and if any process at all can access a file or set of files
without locking, you can't
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:28:20 -0400
Dennis den...@etinc.com wrote:
I heard a rumor that freebsd runs on a sparc, but I dont see any backing
for that. Is it in the works?
FreeBSD does not run on the SPARC. I think they've been talking about it
for ... what, 5 years now... but it never
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:28:20 -0400
Dennis den...@etinc.com wrote:
I heard a rumor that freebsd runs on a sparc, but I dont see any backing
for that. Is it in the works?
FreeBSD does not run on the SPARC. I think they've been talking about it
for ... what, 5 years now... but it
(I believe it got bounced due to my mistake in To: line.
sorry if you got it multiple times)
Hello, if this mailing list is inappropriate please tell me so.
I contacted radisson hotels for FreeBSDCon reservation with
special discount, to get the following
When I did a remote geographic disk based mirroring product a few
years ago, I just had an ioctl that said that this disk was special
for a while. Then the open routine would fail. This flag was cleared
in the close routine (and by the companion ioctl). I did allow users
to open the device w/o
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
I contacted radisson hotels for FreeBSDCon reservation with
special discount, to get the following email - they don't know
about special rate code FreeBSDCon. What is the exact code for
reservation? Do any of you
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Dennis wrote:
I heard a rumor that freebsd runs on a sparc, but I dont see any backing
for that. Is it in the works?
dennis
It is more correct to say that it passes in and out of the thoughts of
people from time to time, with very little code that has actually
At 9:59 AM +0100 8/23/99, Cillian Sharkey wrote:
* if there are no passwd/group diffs found, don't print anything
out (not even the header). Same for setuid etc. diffs.
I have one change to one of the scripts, the one checking for mail
spool files. I changed it to recognize the spool file
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
I think this would need to be knob-ized. I will ignore these
status reports for some time, and then some event comes up
where I am interested in reviewing all of them. If a partition
goes over 90%, for instance, I will want to know if it's been
growing 1% a week
At 3:28 PM +0930 8/23/99, Greg Lehey wrote:
I'm a little surprised that there's any objection to the concept
of mandatory locking. In transaction processing, locking is not
optional, and if any process at all can access a file or set of...
For what it's worth, I also like the idea of
At 11:29 AM -0400 8/23/99, Chuck Robey wrote:
I think mandatory locking should exist, but only be available to root.
If a program needs this, it must run with root privs, so that ordinary
users cannot wedge the machine, but (as usual) root can shoot himself
in the foot (traditional Unix
At 1:21 AM +0900 8/24/99, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
Well, I'd say advisory lock does the job if the software is written
right, and if the software is not written right, mandatory locking
won't help.
Let's give an example. You right a program using mandatory locking
making access to a file. I
At 1:11 AM +0900 8/24/99, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
I think its a good idea, and hey if people object it can always
be an option like -
option NO_MANDATORY_LOCKING
Phew, that was tough.
When introducing security holes, the default should be the hole
not being present.
Bill Fumerola wrote...
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
I contacted radisson hotels for FreeBSDCon reservation with
special discount, to get the following email - they don't know
about special rate code FreeBSDCon. What is the exact code for
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
Unfortunately, you have to call the local hotel to get reservations, and
not the toll-free national hotline. The hotel in Berkeley doesn't have a
toll free number, so after sitting on hold with the Berkeley Radission for
15 minutes, burning long
Bill Fumerola wrote...
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
Unfortunately, you have to call the local hotel to get reservations, and
not the toll-free national hotline. The hotel in Berkeley doesn't have a
toll free number, so after sitting on hold with the Berkeley Radission for
Now I suppose you're going to come and say that this is bad
programming, and advisory locking would do the job if the software is
written right. Correct. You could also use the same argument to say
that memory protection isn't necessary, because a correctly written
program doesn't
Hi list,
About the problem bellow, I bought a 2940 Adaptec Ultra2 Wide SCSI
controller, but it didn't work too.
I wrote to Justin T. Gibbs and he told me that my problem is not SCSI.
Somebody has any idea?
[]s,
Luiz Morte da Costa Junior
Analista de RedesE-mail:
On 23-Aug-99 Cillian Sharkey wrote:
yes perhaps an /etc/periodic.conf would be good, to control the level
of verbosity and/or set options for each script ?
I've hacked periodic here so that the scripts can be turned off with knobs in
a periodic.conf file. This would simplify customizing new
Has anyone else gotten this server board to work?
I've got an N440BX and have been considering getting the L440GX+ but
haven't because I don't know if it works..
Kevin
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Luiz Morte da Costa Junior wrote:
Hi list,
About the problem bellow, I bought a 2940 Adaptec Ultra2
At 10:12 PM +0200 8/23/99, Mark Murray wrote:
Folk are all skirting around a very convenient (and necessary)
loophole; in cases where there _is_ mandatory locking, there
is always some meta-user which is allowed to violate this.
If we include non-unix systems in the discussion, this isn't
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 11:29 AM -0400 8/23/99, Chuck Robey wrote:
I think mandatory locking should exist, but only be available to root.
If a program needs this, it must run with root privs, so that ordinary
users cannot wedge the machine, but (as usual) root can
Chuck Robey wrote:
I think Garrett's fears are of folks unwittingly wedging machines too
easily, so real mandatory locking ought to be restricted to programs
that root can set up.
And those fears are well-founded, but your proposed solution just creates
another set of bottlenecks. Making
On Monday, 23 August 1999 at 15:28:01 -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 3:28 PM +0930 8/23/99, Greg Lehey wrote:
I'm a little surprised that there's any objection to the concept
of mandatory locking. In transaction processing, locking is not
optional, and if any process at all can access a
Unfortunately, you have to call the local hotel to get reservations, and
not the toll-free national hotline. The hotel in Berkeley doesn't have a
toll free number, so after sitting on hold with the Berkeley Radission for
15 minutes, burning long distance money, I decided to call the
Geoff Rehmet writes:
Also have a look at ports/security/nmap, and go to
www.insecure.org.
Hm, just did that. While reading up on nmap, I saw this:
TCP Initial Window -- This simply involves checking the window
size on returned packets. [...] In their completely rewritten
TCP stack
Hi Greg, hackers list,
I don't want to express an opinion about the need or otherwise
for mandatory locking, but I would appreciate a teensy
clarification of the problem domain:
On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 05:43:45PM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote:
To write a block to a RAID-5 device, you need to:
On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 03:28:01PM -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
Anyway, I am also puzzled as to why there would be much objection
to the option of mandatory locking. My initial systems-programming
If you provide mandatory locks that can be broken, then many of the
objections may
On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 10:12:38PM +0200, Mark Murray wrote:
In process-space, this is the kernel. In file-space, this should
be root. Processes that require mandatory locking must revoke
superuser before attempting locks.
I don't like restricting the breaking of mandatory locks to the
On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 12:28:32AM -0700, Christopher Seiwald wrote:
The alteration that I've tried and tested is to have the isort bail
back to qsort if it does more than N swaps. I put N at 1024, which
Perhaps a ratio: #comparisons : # swaps
If the ratio gets too high, then bail.
--
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999 17:44:47 -0700
Dave Walton wal...@nordicrecords.com wrote:
Hm, just did that. While reading up on nmap, I saw this:
TCP Initial Window -- This simply involves checking the window
size on returned packets. [...] In their completely rewritten
TCP stack
The thing about well-intentioned but incorrect locking code is that
it will appear to work fine, until it trips over the one code path
where it forgets to lock some file that it should have locked. And
even then, the code will work just fine, until multiple processes
are accessing that file
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Christopher Masto wrote:
The thing about well-intentioned but incorrect locking code is that
it will appear to work fine, until it trips over the one code path
where it forgets to lock some file that it should have locked. And
even then, the code will work just fine,
On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 10:59:10PM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
Dunno about that.. if you're using advisory locking, you know to say
lock the file, then read the data, do your calculation, write it out,
and unlock. This manditory locking sounds like an invitation for
disaster. I don't need
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Christopher Masto wrote:
Bleah.. I can't count the number of times I've seen idiotic code like:
open file
read data
close file
open file for write
write data
close file
Mandatory locking of the type above doesn't force such a thing to work.
What has that code you
On Monday, 23 August 1999 at 23:11:30 -0400, Christopher Masto wrote:
On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 10:59:10PM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
Dunno about that.. if you're using advisory locking, you know to say
lock the file, then read the data, do your calculation, write it out,
and unlock. This
On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 11:16:21PM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Christopher Masto wrote:
Bleah.. I can't count the number of times I've seen idiotic code like:
open file
read data
close file
open file for write
write data
close file
Mandatory locking of
On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 12:52:10PM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote:
No, I think you're confusing opening and locking. It's something like
this:
User 1User 2
open file open file
lock file read file (blocks)
diddle file
On Monday, 23 August 1999 at 23:34:34 -0400, Christopher Masto wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 12:52:10PM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote:
No, I think you're confusing opening and locking. It's something like
this:
User 1 User 2
open fileopen file
On Monday, 23 August 1999 at 23:27:27 -0400, Christopher Masto wrote:
On Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 11:16:21PM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Christopher Masto wrote:
Bleah.. I can't count the number of times I've seen idiotic code like:
open file
read data
close file
open file
I am involved in a messaging system at work in which we need to send/receive
large amounts of small (one line messages) SMTP messages. We are currently
using Sendmail 8.9.3
on HPUX.
Our application sends messages down a FIFO to a daemon process that is reading
from
the FIFO. This process then
Wayne Cuddy wrote:
I am involved in a messaging system at work in which we need to send/receive
large amounts of small (one line messages) SMTP messages. We are currently
using Sendmail 8.9.3
on HPUX.
Our application sends messages down a FIFO to a daemon process that is
reading from
I am involved in a messaging system at work in which we need to send/receive
large amounts of small (one line messages) SMTP messages. We are currently
using Sendmail 8.9.3
on HPUX.
Our application sends messages down a FIFO to a daemon process that is reading
from
the FIFO. This process then
Thank you for your reply. At what point should I set this socket option? I
am assuming right after the socket is allocated??
I will try this and post my results tomorrow night.
For those wondering, I cannot just execute Sendmail directly, there are many
architectural reasons for this
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Wayne Cuddy wrote:
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 00:38:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Wayne Cuddy wa...@crb-web.com
To: FreeBSD Hackers List freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: network performance vs. linux on small transfers
I am involved in a messaging system at work in which we
As an (former) implementer of fast TCP/IP peer-peer communications, I'd have
to agree with Dave, and say that it is definitely the TCP_NODELAY option.
You'll find that disabling the TCP-ACK delay will greatly increase your
performace.
The reason that it is so slow is because the TCP/IP stack is
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, kadal wrote:
On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Wayne Cuddy wrote:
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 00:38:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Wayne Cuddy wa...@crb-web.com
To: FreeBSD Hackers List freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: network performance vs. linux on small transfers
I am
Wayne Cuddy scribbled this message on Aug 24:
Thank you for your reply. At what point should I set this socket option? I
am assuming right after the socket is allocated??
I will try this and post my results tomorrow night.
For those wondering, I cannot just execute Sendmail directly,
101 - 163 of 163 matches
Mail list logo
