Theo Buehler wrote:
> Two small things for signify -C:
>
> Contrary to what usage suggests, the -p pubkey argument for signify -C
> is optional in that signify will use the key specified in the untrusted
> comment. In -V mode, the key can be tied down a little by specifying -t.
>
> Right now,
Two small things for signify -C:
Contrary to what usage suggests, the -p pubkey argument for signify -C
is optional in that signify will use the key specified in the untrusted
comment. In -V mode, the key can be tied down a little by specifying -t.
Right now, the -t keytype argument is silently
Ted Unangst wrote:
> MarcusMüller wrote:
> > I've just stumbled across a malfunction in signify: It cannot handle
> > file names that contain a `)` character, when checking a list of hashes
> > generated by `sha256` command line utilities (`sha256sum --tags` on
> > Linux).
>
> This fix is
MarcusMüller wrote:
> I've just stumbled across a malfunction in signify: It cannot handle
> file names that contain a `)` character, when checking a list of hashes
> generated by `sha256` command line utilities (`sha256sum --tags` on
> Linux).
This fix is unfortunately rather complicated for
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 02:45:46PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> The RDE needs to know the local v4 and v6 address of a session so that
> nexthop self works. Until now the lookup for the other AF address was done
> in the RDE when the session got established. This diff moves this code
> over to
On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 12:44:59PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 09:27:50AM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > In -current I added support for the additional I2C busses on piixpm(4)
> > now I noticed that on my old AMD system the I2C bus seems to either
> > connect all those 4
Klemens Nanni wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 11:50:01AM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Your text seems somewhat backwards, because if you can't open it, it
> > doesn't matter if it is read-only, it is read-not.
> It starts with what holds true unconditionally: the fact that you cannot
>
On 20.1.2020. 17:40, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> Appreciate the testing.
np, i like testing network stuff :)
> Given what dlg@ has said in the past I think there should only be a
> performance change in a livelock situation.
yeah, that could be problem with this testing ...
kern.netlivelocks=6
I noticed that the following amd(8) map did not actually mount the
remote NFS filesystem with the wxallowed mount option:
/defaults sublink:=${key}
* host==eeyore;type:=link;fs:=/vol/local/${host}; \
On 20.1.2020. 16:42, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Diff below is a refactoring of the actual em(4) code and defines that
> will allows me to present a shorter diff to interrupt multiple CPUs and
> make use of multiple queues.
>
> It contains the following items:
>
> - Abstract the
On 20/01/20(Mon) 07:19, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > [...]
> > I'd appreciate particular review of the following items:
> >
> > * Event producer/consumer code which currently needs a mutex. The
> >current implementation doesn't always use a PCB per-CPU. Moving
> >to a lockless
> On Jan 20, 2020, at 4:47 AM, Hrvoje Popovski wrote:
>
> On 16.1.2020. 18:45, Scott Cheloha wrote:
>> Here's a first batch of conversions: rx refill timeouts for bnxt(4),
>> myx(4), and vr(4). All of these can run during a softclock(). Will
>> changing these to one tick break these drivers?
>
On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 11:04:16PM +0100, Remi Locherer wrote:
> This makes the interface setting "type p2p" configurable globally or
> per area. ospf(6)d allows this for almost all interface related settings.
>
> As a side-effect of this diff ospf(6)d -nv prints "type p2p" also for
>
No need to pass peerid to lsa_snap()
While at it, remove unused variable.
Index: rde.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/ospf6d/rde.c,v
retrieving revision 1.82
diff -u -p -r1.82 rde.c
--- rde.c 2 Jan 2020 10:16:46 -
Diff below is a refactoring of the actual em(4) code and defines that
will allows me to present a shorter diff to interrupt multiple CPUs and
make use of multiple queues.
It contains the following items:
- Abstract the allocation/freeing of TX/RX ring into em_dma_malloc().
This will ease
Some upd(4) devices use -1 for "On" and some use 1. sysctl(8) and
sensorsd(8) hide this detail from the user, which makes it difficult to
define low and high values in sensorsd.conf(5).
Also see https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc=144529176814155=2
I'd like to suggest a diff like the
On 16.1.2020. 18:45, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> Here's a first batch of conversions: rx refill timeouts for bnxt(4),
> myx(4), and vr(4). All of these can run during a softclock(). Will
> changing these to one tick break these drivers?
Hi all,
i tried this diff with myx and performance are the
17 matches
Mail list logo
