Re: Questions about the code review process in OpenBSD
> 6. nov. 2022 kl. 21:32 skrev i...@tutanota.com: > > I am the sysadmin at our company responsible for the OpenBSD > based projects. When I read about the problems at FreeBSD, after > which I wrote to their list, I was sure that the process was different > in OpenBSD, to which several users on FreeBSD replied, that > OpenBSD doesn't do code review on each commit, yada yada. I would not treat statements by one or more random users of a different operating system on a mailing list for that system as anywhere near authoritative on what OpenBSD developers do or do not do. As others have already indicated, you will get a more complete picture by looking up the issues on tech@ and bugs@ as well as the platform-specific lists. But keep in mind that there will occasionally be situations where the review is by private channels, such as when dealing with security issues under embargo. But in the general case, yes, review via tech@ is required, commits without OKs will have a high risk of being reverted. I would suggest that if your colleagues need information on project goals and methods, https://www.openbsd.org/goals.html would be a useful place to start. - Peter PS the first link in my .signature leads on to among other things articles that might be of interest while you put off posting the next message to this thread. — Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/ "Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic" delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds. signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
Re: iwx not getting to status: active
> 5. jul. 2021 kl. 04:58 skrev Greg Steuck : > > I stumbled upon a weird hotel WiFi which never gets to a fully running > link with iwx0. I see ifconfig is stuck with: > > iwx0: flags=808847 > mtu 1500 >lladdr xx >index 1 priority 4 llprio 3 >groups: wlan egress >media: IEEE802.11 autoselect (HT-MCS11 mode 11n) >status: no network >ieee80211: nwid MarlinGuest chan 4 bssid 38:ff:36:23:09:a8 68% wpakey > wpaprotos wpa2 wpaakms psk wpaciphers ccmp wpagroupcipher tkip > > The network is functional as evidenced by the assorted android and > chromeos devices connecting to it. I once encountered a hotel wifi which only let my OpenBSD laptop connect and have a properly working connection after I reduced the MTU 700-ish bytes. That may or may not be related to the problem you are seeing. - Peter — Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/ "Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic" delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds. signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
Re: next LibreSSL-portable release coming soon
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 08:54:08AM -0600, Brent Cook wrote: > https://github.com/libressl-portable/portable > > Please test if you can. Thanks! Looks good on an amd64 Ubuntu 14.04 machine with gcc 4.8.2: TOTAL: 44 PASS: 44 SKIP: 0 XFAIL: 0 FAIL: 0 XPASS: 0 ERROR: 0 Nicolai
Re: signed packages
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 02:33:56PM -0200, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote: > DNSSEC would make things a little simpler All the TLD and other massive outages say otherwise. I can think of one project that uses DNSSEC to verify files via TXT lookups. Their last DNSSEC outage? 3 days ago. Ed25519 in signify provides a 128-bit security level and is decentralized. DNSSEC provides 112 bits at best, via a government-controlled hierarchy. Nicolai
