Hi everyone,
I would like to add a clear screen feature for the vi mode of ksh.
I have seen that it has been done for the emacs mode last year and wanned to
adapt that code to vi.
But it isn't quite a success for now because it's hard for me to get were the
clear screen operation is actually
Hi,
When pf rule with a "on rdomain n" with nonexisting rdomain n causes
/etc/pf.conf:XXX: rdomain n does not exist
error. But with a "rtable n" with nonexisting rtable n will cause
pfctl: DIOCADDRULE: Device busy
error. It is hard to find the cause by this error message.
On Sun, 13 Sep 2020 20:45:35 +0800, Nick Gasson wrote:
> I struggled a bit to configure smtpd to relay to a remote server that
> requires SSL client certificates. The solution is to just add a "pki
> host.example.org" option, but "pki" is not listed as a valid option for
> the relay delivery
On 2020-09-13 12:40, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 11:28:11AM -0400, Demi M. Obenour wrote:
>> Resending without quoted-printable encoding, in case that helps.
>> ---
>> If an RTM_ADD command on a routing socket includes an RTA_IFA sockaddr,
>> and that sockaddr is an exact match
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 04:49:48PM +0200, Sebastien Marie wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 03:29:57PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > I'm no longer able to reproduce the corruption while building lang/go
> > with the diff below. Something relevant to threading change in go since
> > march?
> >
On 2020/09/13 14:47, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> So there's a dance around UP interfaces already; CVS log dates this
> code back to 2010 when deraadt rearanged code into ifnewlladdr(), the
> previous if.c revision also head this dance around UP.
>
> The if_down() line I removed from trunk(4) dates
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 11:28:11AM -0400, Demi M. Obenour wrote:
> Resending without quoted-printable encoding, in case that helps.
> ---
> If an RTM_ADD command on a routing socket includes an RTA_IFA sockaddr,
> and that sockaddr is an exact match for one of the interfaces in the
> relevant
> Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2020 17:54:18 +0200
> From: Martin Pieuchot
>
> On 13/09/20(Sun) 16:54, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2020 16:49:48 +0200
> > > From: Sebastien Marie
> > >
> > > On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 03:29:57PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > > I'm no longer able to
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 09:15:15AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> crashes -- but without any kernel printfs?
crashes and no kernel printfs
--
Sebastien Marie
On 13/09/20(Sun) 16:54, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2020 16:49:48 +0200
> > From: Sebastien Marie
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 03:29:57PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > I'm no longer able to reproduce the corruption while building lang/go
> > > with the diff below.
Resending without quoted-printable encoding, in case that helps.
---
If an RTM_ADD command on a routing socket includes an RTA_IFA sockaddr,
and that sockaddr is an exact match for one of the interfaces in the
relevant routing domain, any RTA_IFP sockaddr in the same message is
ignored. If there
> From: "Theo de Raadt"
> Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2020 08:56:04 -0600
>
> Sebastien Marie wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 03:29:57PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > I'm no longer able to reproduce the corruption while building lang/go
> > > with the diff below. Something relevant to
We need to know which one is hitting a broken counter party -- is it the
stack checker, or the syscall checker.
Sebastien Marie wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 03:29:57PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > I'm no longer able to reproduce the corruption while building lang/go
> > with the diff below. Something relevant to threading change in go since
> > march?
> >
> > Can someone try this diff and tell
> Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2020 16:49:48 +0200
> From: Sebastien Marie
>
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 03:29:57PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > I'm no longer able to reproduce the corruption while building lang/go
> > with the diff below. Something relevant to threading change in go since
> > march?
>
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 03:29:57PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> I'm no longer able to reproduce the corruption while building lang/go
> with the diff below. Something relevant to threading change in go since
> march?
>
> Can someone try this diff and tell me if go and/or rust still fail?
Hello Klemens.
pppoe(4) input path and pppoe(4) config path (I mean clone/destroy)
is always different context. Your diff introduces the new lock which
protects `pppoe_softc_list’ list but what should protect `sc’ you got
from this list after you released `pppoe_lock’?
I mean this dereference is
Hi,
I struggled a bit to configure smtpd to relay to a remote server that
requires SSL client certificates. The solution is to just add a "pki
host.example.org" option, but "pki" is not listed as a valid option for
the relay delivery method, even though the parser accepts it.
Index: smtpd.conf.5
On 13/09/20(Sun) 15:12, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> This is my first try trading global locks for interface specific ones.
>
> pppoe(4) keeps a list of all its interfaces which is then obviously
> traversed during create and destroy.
>
> Currently, the net lock is grabbed for this, but there seems to
I'm no longer able to reproduce the corruption while building lang/go
with the diff below. Something relevant to threading change in go since
march?
Can someone try this diff and tell me if go and/or rust still fail?
Index: uvm/uvm_map.c
This is my first try trading global locks for interface specific ones.
pppoe(4) keeps a list of all its interfaces which is then obviously
traversed during create and destroy.
Currently, the net lock is grabbed for this, but there seems to be no
justification other than reusing^Wabusing an
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 01:23:59PM +0200, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 11:31:12AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > On 2020/09/13 11:12, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > This has been tried before, I forget what but there were problems
> >
> > from chat logs when I tried this
On 2020/09/13 13:23, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 11:31:12AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > On 2020/09/13 11:12, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > This has been tried before, I forget what but there were problems
> >
> > from chat logs when I tried this before:
> >
> > 14:52 <
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 11:31:12AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2020/09/13 11:12, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > This has been tried before, I forget what but there were problems
>
> from chat logs when I tried this before:
>
> 14:52 < sthen> if i kill the if_down, no crash, but the mac
Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2020/09/13 11:12, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > This has been tried before, I forget what but there were problems
>
> from chat logs when I tried this before:
>
> 14:52 < sthen> if i kill the if_down, no crash, but the mac address doesn't
> get updated so i end up
Not all PS/2-like controllers accept the AUXECHO command, and the test that
pckbc applies in order to check for the presence of the auxiliary interface
may yield false negatives, even on newer hardware (see
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc=158413132831425=2
).
This patch adds an alternative
On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 12:23:50PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Without doing another audit but with the fact that pseudo-device are
> generally run by a thread holding the NET_LOCK() I'd assume it's ok.
Thanks, I'll put it in as its an improvement and comment only (safe);
rest can happen
On 2020/09/13 11:12, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> This has been tried before, I forget what but there were problems
from chat logs when I tried this before:
14:52 < sthen> if i kill the if_down, no crash, but the mac address doesn't get
updated so i end up with the same one on em0, em1, trunk0
On 13/09/20(Sun) 10:05, Klemens Nanni wrote:
>
> Here's a start at struct pppoe_softc; for every member I went through
> code paths looking for *_LOCK() or *_ASSERT_LOCKED().
>
> Pretty much all members are under the net lock, some are proctected by
> both net and kernel lock, e.g. the start
This has been tried before, I forget what but there were problems
--
Sent from a phone, apologies for poor formatting.
On 12 September 2020 21:16:31 Alexander Bluhm wrote:
OK bluhm@
On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 05:49:52PM +0200, Klemens Nanni wrote:
Index: if_trunk.c
Since I recently opened my big fat mouth and suggested that
"kern.video.record" (analogous to kern.audio.record) might be a good idea, I
decided to put together a quick prototype (heavily based on the
kern.audio.record code). This at least roughly works for me but raises some
questions such as:
Here's a start at struct pppoe_softc; for every member I went through
code paths looking for *_LOCK() or *_ASSERT_LOCKED().
Pretty much all members are under the net lock, some are proctected by
both net and kernel lock, e.g. the start routine is called with
KERNEL_LOCK().
I did not go
32 matches
Mail list logo
