Re: The sendmail discussion...
On Thursday 28 March 2002 06:39 am, Robert L Sowders wrote: | Greg is absolutely correct. | | These whiners, who constantly moan for code while never contributing any, | should contribute the code if they want it changed. | | Also I shudder to think that those who customize their systems would | actually learn how to use all the tools available to them to prevent a | makeworld from overwriting or undoing their customizations. :) I was sorta wondering about that . . . The whole mailwrapper takes care of this anyway, doesn't it? At least that's what it's there for . . . don't you just re-install the port and voila! life is good again? | I wish that we could assign a bitch rating to some of these emails. Say a | sliding bitch scale depending on how much code the bitchee has | contributed. Then they could easily be filtered to /dev/null. | Waddayathink? ;) So what you are saying is that you never want people to use (or at least to customize) FreeBSD unless they are FreeBSD developers? That's the most extreme version of we won't care about who uses it that I've ever heard. The fact is, it's a lot more convenient for all FreeBSD users if the user base is expanded because it makes hardware and software vendors pay more attention to FreeBSD. So *some* accomidation to people who are at least willing to get their hands dirty with scripts is in the interest of the entire FreeBSD community. Sure, you don't want to lose all the benefits of FreeBSD in a mad rush to accomodate the masses -- I left the Linux fold in part becuase I felt that the mainstream distributions, at least, were going too far to do that, but it's certainly possible to go too far in the other direction as well. | Much ado about nothing, so far, RTFM. | | | | To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] | with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message -- Brian T. Schellenberger . . . . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Brian, the man from Babble-On . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) ME -- http://www.babbleon.org http://www.eff.org -- GOOD GUYS -- http://www.programming-freedom.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT
On Friday 15 March 2002 08:53 pm, Kenneth Culver wrote:
| (ttypa):{1078}% file /usr/local/lib/netscape/communicator-4.7.us.bin
| /usr/local/lib/netscape/communicator-4.7.us.bin: FreeBSD/i386 compact
|demand paged dynamically linked executable
|
| Now, if you'd like to talk Netscape into building a version intended for
| a version of FreeBSD newer than, say, 3 years, 3.5 months (approximately)
| old...
|
| I didn't realize anyone still used netscape 4.x. It's so disgustingly
| unstable and slow.
Well, the linux-netscape 4 is the only browser I know that can handle Java
pages on FreeBSD.
Are there others?
If you mean the FreeBSD-native netscape 4.x; yes, it's perfectly silly to run
*that*.
|
| Ken
|
|
| To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
--
Brian T. Schellenberger . . . . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work)
Brian, the man from Babble-On . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal)
ME -- http://www.babbleon.org
http://www.eff.org -- GOOD GUYS -- http://www.programming-freedom.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Junior Annoying Hacker Task
On Saturday 02 February 2002 03:57 pm, Juha Saarinen wrote: On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Brian T.Schellenberger wrote: No, it's not, because it still maintains a separation between system control (rc.conf) and application control (/var/packges). It's more like config.sys or something . . . Much more than that. The registry also stores dynamic data, such as performance counters. It's also remotable, for centralised management. No, no, I was saying that *rc.conf* was more like config.sys than the registry. The registry is a huge monolithic monstor of an abomination from hell. Not that I don't like it or anything :-) -- Brian T. Schellenberger . . . . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Brian, the man from Babble-On . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) ME -- http://www.babbleon.org http://www.eff.org -- GOOD GUYS -- http://www.programming-freedom.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Junior Annoying Hacker Task
On Saturday 02 February 2002 06:15 am, Terry Lambert wrote: Wilko Bulte wrote: I would add differences like: the M$ registry is bound to be corrupted, is only accessible by obscure tools, is for the best part not documented In other words why should FreeBSD adopt something like that? rc.conf is a registry in all but tools. 8-). No, it's not, because it still maintains a separation between system control (rc.conf) and application control (/var/packges). It's more like config.sys or something . . . -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message -- Brian T. Schellenberger . . . . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Brian, the man from Babble-On . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) ME -- http://www.babbleon.org http://www.eff.org -- GOOD GUYS -- http://www.programming-freedom.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Junior Annoying Hacker Task
On Friday 01 February 2002 07:26 pm, Terry Lambert wrote: foo_enable=NO ipfilter_enable=YES firewall_enable=NO natd_enable=NO natd_interface=fxp0 inetd_enable=NO inetd_program=/usr/sbin/inetd foo_enable=YES/NO foo_enable=NO Who is a GTK hacker? Does someone want to write a registry editor program? Yuch. Why? The point of the program would be to edit the FreeBSD Registry, rc.conf, and make it look just like the Windows Registry in the editor, using _ as the implied path component/terminal component (key) seperator. You are surely insane. Or trying to make a point which isn't true, which is pretty similar. Then we can all be honest with ourselves that the only difference between it an the Windows Registry is that the Windows registry is accessible/modifiable from kernel mode, and the path component and key names. No, there's are enormous differences: - There's a well-known plain-text file so it can be readily backed up and restored. - There is not a single point of failure for all progams; it only controls basic system functions and services, it does not control applications, so if it fails, your applications aren't all screwed up, and if your applications screw up terribly they can't corrupt your basic system. Indeed, the lack of an API to *write* to /etc/rc.conf is one of it's greatest strengths: It is far less vulnerable to major corruption if things go nutty. You can start with: My Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\natd NameData --- - enable NO interface fxp0 My Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\inetd NameData --- - enable NO program /usr/sbin/inetd etc. If you want to get ambitious: o Make HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE an alias for your node name, and include your node name in the list. o Call it localhost, if you are feeling too guilty about calling it HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE. o Make the tool operate on node names other than localhost, so you can do remote administration of configuration files on a cluster of FreeBSD boxes o Add more subkeys; perhaps it should not be just My Computer\localhost\inetd but My Computer\localhost\rc.conf\inetd letting you fold in the other files, like the inetd.conf, into registry handlers, e.g.: My Computer\localhost\inetd.conf\telnet enable NO sockettype stream protocoltcp waitNO userroot program /usr/libexec/telnetd etc.. o Support sysctls in the HKEY_DYN_DATA and HKEY_CURRENT_CONFIG sections (for those that can go into loader.rc). Sure, people would be annoyed to find out that they had been moving towards an idea that Microsoft had developed, but wouldn't this be a fun tweak to people's tails? 8-) 8-) 8-) -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message -- Brian T. Schellenberger . . . . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Brian, the man from Babble-On . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) ME -- http://www.babbleon.org http://www.eff.org -- GOOD GUYS -- http://www.programming-freedom.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Junior Annoying Hacker Task
On Friday 01 February 2002 08:38 pm, Terry Lambert wrote: Brian T.Schellenberger wrote: - There is not a single point of failure for all progams; it only controls basic system functions and services, it does not control applications, so if it fails, your applications aren't all screwed up, and if your applications screw up terribly they can't corrupt your basic system. firewall_enable=NO I wouldn't think of a firewall as an application program. I can be certain that installing or corrupting or otherwise screwing up my text editor, my image-editing program, by CD-management program, my financial program, my DVD-viewing program, my newsreader, or my browser won't break my firewall. That's the big drawback of the stupid registry idea. Indeed, the lack of an API to *write* to /etc/rc.conf is one of it's greatest strengths: It is far less vulnerable to major corruption if things go nutty. vi? sed? any text editor? Yes, but application programs aren't writing to it. You only write to it when you set down to do it. So vi acts like regedit, except that it's much easier to find things manipulate since you have the same interface to that file that you have to everything else. (For example, Linux maintains kernel options in much this same way, but it's *much* easier to just with an editable (commented) kernel config file; that's a big part of the reason I went back to FreeBSD. The lack of constraints on how one may interact with the rc.conf is one of its main weaknesses. A single missing quotation mark will result in an inaccessible system, if you don't have console access, and one that must be repaired, if you do. There's not even a virc equivalent to vipw, that can do a consistency check on the file to make sure it's sourceable by a shell script, before permitting the edits to replace the valid contents, and keep a backup of the previous file for you. I've never so messed myself up, but I can see where that would be a problem. *This* is a good idea, actually. Alternately, we can just call a spade a spade, and admit that what we have is a flat file registry, which pretends to be hierarchical by using _ as a hierachy delimiter for component seperation. I don't see that at all--the most distinctive characteristic to me of the Microsoft Windows Registry is that it tries to be a *single* place where *all* configuration information--both system and application--is written. If you ask Microsoft I'm pretty sure they'd tell you that's it's prime advantage and I claim that it's prime drawback. Either way, that's what most distinguishes it. Actually, this is a lot like the Manx subdirectory support in the shell program that came with the developement environment, and used topdir/subdir/finaldir as the name of the directory, and simply hid the names of all but the last component. 8-). Building this information into a directory hierarchy sounds clever but gives me nightmares in recalling the startup / daemon control in Linux (using the ATT scheme, I believe)--which sounds like a good idea in theory but I always found was an absolute nightmare in practice. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message -- Brian T. Schellenberger . . . . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Brian, the man from Babble-On . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) ME -- http://www.babbleon.org http://www.eff.org -- GOOD GUYS -- http://www.programming-freedom.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
