Re: Does Intel driver supports Intel g31?

Clearly Russia is guilty of everything in this world. But Kazakhstan is not Russia. And your post shows that stupid people live not only in Kazakhstan. 11.04.2020 18:24, m brandenberg пишет: On Sat, 11 Apr 2020, Nikita Stepanov wrote: Does Intel driver supports Intel g31? Clearly, Russia's

webmaster@ (was: RE: openbsd.org down?)

Haai, mewrote: > Cc'ing webmaster@ (assuming it exists). That didn't go so well: a "mailing list expansion problem", apparently on the side of mail.openbsd.org. Since it ain't an obvious rejection, me's informed postmaster@. --zeur. -- Friggin' Machines!

RE: openbsd.org down?

"Durial EB" wrote: > Still down for me. Appears intermittent. Cc'ing webmaster@ (assuming it exists). --zeurkous. > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 5:44 PM wrote: > >> > Hello. >> > >> > What happened to the openbsd.org? >> > I seems to be down for 10+ hours for now. >> >> WFM. Empty your

Re: openbsd.org down?

Still down for me. On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 5:44 PM wrote: > > Hello. > > > > What happened to the openbsd.org? > > I seems to be down for 10+ hours for now. > > WFM. Empty your name swerver cache, it might help. > > > Regards, > > > > Roman > > --zeur. > > -- > Friggin' Machines! > >

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 10:18:13PM +0100, Patrick Harper wrote: > My understanding of -current is that it is meant for testing, not usage. On the contrary. Or at least: for testing, BY usage! Cheers, Erling > -- > Patrick Harper > paia...@fastmail.com > > On Sun, 12 Apr 2020, at 21:38,

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

Patrick Harper writes: > My understanding of -current is that it is meant for testing, not usage. Not strictly true. Depends on your needs, and tolerance for things not always working perfectly. Allan

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

I'm puzzled that you thought my statements were a complaint. -- Patrick Harper paia...@fastmail.com On Sun, 12 Apr 2020, at 22:30, Theo de Raadt wrote: > Patrick Harper wrote: > > > I mean that all Chromium releases are made available for OpenBSD-stable > > (excluding the previous

Re: openbsd.org down?

Maybe to much download from ftp.openbsd.org? It is up now openbsd.org

RE: openbsd.org down?

> Hello. > > What happened to the openbsd.org? > I seems to be down for 10+ hours for now. WFM. Empty your name swerver cache, it might help. > Regards, > > Roman --zeur. -- Friggin' Machines!

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

Patrick Harper wrote: > I mean that all Chromium releases are made available for OpenBSD-stable > (excluding the previous release at any given time, as with all existing port > maintenance). So you want constant Chromium updates in -stable. Who's going to do that? Are you going to do it?

openbsd.org down?

Hello. What happened to the openbsd.org? I seems to be down for 10+ hours for now. Regards, Roman

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

I mean that all Chromium releases are made available for OpenBSD-stable (excluding the previous release at any given time, as with all existing port maintenance). My understanding of -current is that it is meant for testing, not usage. -- Patrick Harper paia...@fastmail.com On Sun, 12

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

On April 12, 2020 7:07:01 PM UTC, Patrick Harper wrote: >The effort to support Chromium and Firefox (sans ESR) on OpenBSD akin >to Windows/macOS/'Linux' has not happened. On atleast current as Theo showed, Chromium is just as well if not better supported on OpenBSD than on Linux, these days. I

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

The effort to support Chromium and Firefox (sans ESR) on OpenBSD akin to Windows/macOS/'Linux' has not happened. -- Patrick Harper paia...@fastmail.com On Sun, 12 Apr 2020, at 16:49, Raymond, David wrote: > My problem with iridium is that it is based on an older version of > chromium and I

Re: Apr 9 snapshot bsd.mp fails on VMware

Reviewing sizes of /bsd*, they looked odd. So after a bunch of poking and checking a new install on a new VM (which worked) I manually rebuilt the MP kernel from the SP boot. And got this: # ls -l /bsd* -rwx-- 1 root wheel 18622131 Apr 12 18:01 /bsd -rwx-- 1 root wheel 17806667

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

Theo, Thanks for your explanations. I appreciate the efforts of you and your colleagues in keeping OpenBSD as up to date and secure as possible. That is one of the main reasons I am using it. Dave Raymond On 4/12/20, Theo de Raadt wrote: > Raymond, David wrote: > >> That said, I am a bit

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

Elias M. Mariani wrote: > Actually, I was just checking the ports-changes mailing-list, and the > sync between Iridium and Chromium made me ask this. Step right up, step right up, there's room for volunteers

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

Actually, I was just checking the ports-changes mailing-list, and the sync between Iridium and Chromium made me ask this. In any case, OpenBSD ports has nothing to do with this question. I ask here just because the OpenBSD community has a better view of this things. And (so far) they had made

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

Raymond, David wrote: > That said, I am a bit nervous about OpenBSD's lags in > keeping up with browser security fixes. It isn't that simple. They don't ship security fixes standalone. Instead, they ship a mix of new changes *and* fixes. Lots of new unrelated changes, and only a few security

Re: Iridium vs Chromium

My problem with iridium is that it is based on an older version of chromium and I am not sure that they keep up with inevitable flow of security fixes. That said, I am a bit nervous about OpenBSD's lags in keeping up with browser security fixes. (I'm not criticizing -- I understand that OpenBSD

Re: i386 kernel relinking

FWIW, the GNU linker can reorder the kernel on i386-current with 256MB RAM: # env LD=ld.bfd /usr/libexec/reorder_kernel --- relink.log: (SHA256) /bsd: OK LD="ld.bfd" LDFLAGS="-g" sh makegap.sh 0x gapdummy.o ld.bfd -T ld.script -X --warn-common -nopie -o newbsd ${SYSTEM_HEAD} vers.o

Iridium vs Chromium

I'm not much of a browser savy guy. Is Iridium really safer than Chromium? Leaving aside the "Google is tracking you!". Any recommendations on the browser front on performance, security and compatibility? I've been using Chrome and Chromium for years, but maybe there are better alternatives that

Re: Wine for OpenBSD?

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 08:24, slackwaree wrote: > > You don't want wine anyway. That is the shining example of badly written > software which sucked 15 years ago the same way it does today. T Provided Wine is now broken on most modern OSes that only ship with 64-bit binaries, there are tons of

Re: Wine for OpenBSD?

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:24:09 + slackwaree wrote: > You don't want wine anyway. That is the shining example of badly written > software which sucked 15 years ago the same way it does today. They tried to > make it better with cedega, crossover office and what not and failed > miserably.

Re: Wine for OpenBSD?

On April 12, 2020 10:24:09 AM GMT+03:00, slackwaree wrote: >You don't want wine anyway. That is the shining example of badly >written software which sucked 15 years ago the same way it does today. >They tried to make it better with cedega, crossover office and what not >and failed miserably. All

openbsd.org down?

Can’t reach openbsd.org - planned maintenance?

Re: Wine for OpenBSD?

You don't want wine anyway. That is the shining example of badly written software which sucked 15 years ago the same way it does today. They tried to make it better with cedega, crossover office and what not and failed miserably. All you could get out of it is to run basic apps like notepad or