Raman Ng wrote:
I don't know what mailing list this mail should be
posted to, sorry if it is posted to the wrong mailing
list.
Recently I found Linux 2.4 kernel is affected by the
bug of extended paging in AMD Athlon through the
following link. I don't know if FreeBSD is also
affected.
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 11:55:13PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Emiel Kollof wrote:
Julian Elischer heeft op maandag 21 januari 2002 om 08:34 het volgende
geschreven:
Lots of my old programs get:
/usr/libexec/ld-elf.so.1:
Hello,
I just upgraded to -current today to get a couple of
features including devfs working. In the process I
have run into a few questions (mainly things to do with
the fact that up until a few days ago I was only using
linux 2.4.x):
1) Will either the in kernel or oss sound driver for
First off, you sent this to the wrong list. Most of the questions you
bring up in here should have been directed at -questions.
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 09:22:08AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just upgraded to -current today to get a couple of
features including devfs working. In the
I am well aware of this bug.
It does not affect FreeBSD, which only uses 4M pages
for
the first 4M of the kernel itself.
I've worked on code that enables 4M pages on other
memory
used in FreeBSD, that had this problem, but only if
you
were really stupid in your allocation mechanism.
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please explain two moments:
1) What is stack reaction on this option? Is it the same like PAM_AUTH_ERR
reaction or not?
Yes.
2) Can PAM_SYSTEM_ERR be returned by pam_authenticate() ? If yes. login.c
and ftpd.c must be fixed to add this code.
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) When OPIE turned on in the system, not neccessary all users are
OPIE-ed, only those who listed in /etc/opiekeys. It means that
pam_opieaccess() module must do something only for valid OPIE users
listed in /etc/opiekeys and do nothing for
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 13:54:29 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Umm, you can't use opiechallenge() for that. You're not supposed to
call opiechallenge() without also calling opieverify() (plus, I think
No, it is possible, when opieunlock() called afterwards (as I do).
BTW, the same way
This is looking good!
Please keep a close eye on style (there is at least one assignment in
an if () statement that needs to move out. :-)
M
--=-=-=
Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Umm, you can't use opiechallenge() for that. You're not supposed to
call opiechallenge()
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 14:07:48 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Umm, you can't use opiechallenge() for that. You're not supposed to
call opiechallenge() without also calling opieverify() (plus, I think
opiechallenge() consumes a challenge).
Hi Tom,
No, I have this same card running on a Toshiba Tecra 8100,
and it does indeed use the dc driver, and the ethernet part
of it does indeed work (I'm running Current, last updated yesterday).
The dc driver needs the miibus device configured in the kernel in order
to work correctly, and it
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 14:07:48 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Umm, you can't use opiechallenge() for that. You're not supposed to
call opiechallenge() without also calling opieverify() (plus, I think
opiechallenge() consumes a
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 11:43:28PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Once you guys have this all hammered out, are you going to
integrate PAM and Kerberos? 8-) 8-) 8-).
In what way do you mean?
--
Jacques A. Vidrine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nectar.cc/
NTT/Verio SME .
Does anybody mind if I change the pam_opie(8) prompt from Password:
to Response:? I think users might be slightly confused when they
enter an incorrect or empty response twice and get a new Password:
prompt and don't realize it's the pam_unix(8) prompt.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL
This fixes reflects pam_opieaccess addition.
Few comments:
ftpd: fallback was a hack and not needed now with new pam_opieaccess
login: I believe that there is no authtok change service provided by
pam_opie module, so remove
#password sufficient pam_opie.so no_warn
line
---
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 03:18:32PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Does anybody mind if I change the pam_opie(8) prompt from Password:
to Response:? I think users might be slightly confused when they
enter an incorrect or empty response twice and get a new Password:
prompt and don't
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 15:18:32 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Does anybody mind if I change the pam_opie(8) prompt from Password:
to Response:? I think users might be slightly confused when they
enter an incorrect or empty response twice and get a new Password:
prompt and don't realize
Does anybody mind if I change the pam_opie(8) prompt from Password:
to Response:? I think users might be slightly confused when they
enter an incorrect or empty response twice and get a new Password:
prompt and don't realize it's the pam_unix(8) prompt.
Nope - that sounds good!
M
--
o
and I've made world a lot of times like that.
and if I do it by hand as sugested, it doesn;t make any difference
either.
Just a guess - have you removed existing old libraries from /usr/lib?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the
Some -current binaries can have this, but recompiling usually fixes
it. Also, I have some older 3.x binaries that I had to install
COMPAT3 to get working.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 17:29:01 +0300, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
enter an incorrect or empty response twice and get a new Password:
prompt and don't realize it's the pam_unix(8) prompt.
Wait... First of all, there (I mean original OPIE) must be 2 prompts in
worst case, not 3 prompts:
I
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 15:18:32 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Does anybody mind if I change the pam_opie(8) prompt from Password:
to Response:? I think users might be slightly confused when they
enter an incorrect or empty response twice
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I can't reproduce your 3 prompts situation (or may I misread what you try
to say?) I got only 2 prompts in login and su.
des@des ~% login des
otp-md5 496 de6973 ext
Password: enter
otp-md5 496 de6973 ext
Password [echo on]: enter
Password: unix
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This fixes reflects pam_opieaccess addition.
Augh, I just spent about an hour doing just that (and fixing some
other stuff too). Thanks anyway, I'll compare your patches to mine to
see if we disagree anywhere.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 16:13:54 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I can't reproduce your 3 prompts situation (or may I misread what you try
to say?) I got only 2 prompts in login and su.
des@des ~% login des
otp-md5 496 de6973 ext
Password:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 16:11:47 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Back to your subj.: It breaks, at least, M$ Windows OPIE/Skey generators
which do auto-paste when keyword (Password) is found.
Good point. OPIE Password might be more appropriate, then.
We don't know, what exact
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This fixes reflects pam_opieaccess addition.
OK, comments:
1) there's no reason to have pam_opie commented out now, it won't do
anything unless OPIE is enabled for the target user. With my
patch, any user can use OPIE by simply running
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 16:33:57 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
1) there's no reason to have pam_opie commented out now, it won't do
One reason still exist: all users (i.e. non-OPIE too) will see OTP
responses when pam_opie will be uncommented. It may leads to confusion or
wrong automated
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, I see it too now. It is definitely some bug here. When I say in
login I mean I test it through:
The bug is quite simply that pam_opie(8) never sets the AUTHTOK item,
so pam_unix(8) doesn't know that the user already entered a password.
I
Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The bug is quite simply that pam_opie(8) never sets the AUTHTOK item,
so pam_unix(8) doesn't know that the user already entered a password.
I believe pam_get_pass() should set PAM_AUTHTOK. Any objections?
OK, now I'm really off my rocker;
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 16:33:57 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Patch attached.
I already comment always turning opie on in previous message, besides
that I don't understand one thing in your patch: why you not enable
pam_opie for su and not add pam_opieaccess there? It is enough useful
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I already comment always turning opie on in previous message, besides
that I don't understand one thing in your patch: why you not enable
pam_opie for su and not add pam_opieaccess there? It is enough useful
for sysadmin logging in as user via
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 16:33:57 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
1) there's no reason to have pam_opie commented out now, it won't do
One reason still exist: all users (i.e. non-OPIE too) will see OTP
responses when pam_opie will be uncommented. It may leads to confusion or
wrong
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, I see it too now. It is definitely some bug here. When I say in
login I mean I test it through:
The bug is quite simply that pam_opie(8) never sets the AUTHTOK item,
so pam_unix(8) doesn't know that the user already entered a password.
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 09:45:21AM -0500, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
and I've made world a lot of times like that.
and if I do it by hand as sugested, it doesn;t make any difference
either.
Just a guess - have you removed existing old libraries from /usr/lib?
lib/compact/Makefile.inc takes
Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, now I'm really off my rocker; pam_conv_pass() (called by
pam_get_pass()) does set PAM_AUTHTOK. I still don't understand why
it's NULL by the time pam_unix(8) calls pam_get_pass(). I'll
investigate further.
I found the bug: login(1) only
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 16:54:56 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Ah, I thought pam_opie(8) ignored users that didn't have OPIE set up.
In fact, there is no consensus about that among standalone OPIE
applications, some acts with fake prompts, some - without.
One (among others) argument
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 16:45:41 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
The bug is quite simply that pam_opie(8) never sets the AUTHTOK item,
so pam_unix(8) doesn't know that the user already entered a password.
I believe pam_get_pass() should set PAM_AUTHTOK. Any objections?
No objections.
--
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 16:54:56 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
One (among others) argument _for_ no fake prompts is that standalone
application once compiled with OPIE support can't dynamically turn off
fake prompts using some configuration. For
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 17:14:24 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, now I'm really off my rocker; pam_conv_pass() (called by
pam_get_pass()) does set PAM_AUTHTOK. I still don't understand why
it's NULL by the time pam_unix(8) calls
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 17:24:28 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
- enable OPIE by default, with the no_fake_prompts option, leaving it
up to the admin to enable fake prompts if he so wishes
I vote for this one.
Please, I'm getting paid to do this :) Make yourself a cup of tea or
The problem(s) with sudo have been fixed in the latest sudo CVS release.
This works for me on -CURRENT as of December 16th, 2001 and RELENG_4
--- /tmp/sudo-1.6.5p1/auth/pam.c Mon Dec 31 12:18:12 2001
+++ /home/ancient/test/sudo/auth/pam.c Mon Jan 21 06:54:37 2002
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 17:24:28 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
- enable OPIE by default, with the no_fake_prompts option, leaving it
up to the admin to enable fake prompts if he so wishes
I vote for this one.
I agree, for the reasons
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 18:01:45 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
3) in pam_opie(8), return PAM_AUTH_ERR if no_fake_prompts was
specified and the user hasn't set up OPIE.
We can speed up pam_opie by saving one opielookup() call in this way:
/*
* Don't call the OPIE
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 18:01:45 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
1) if pam_get_pass(), if the current token is non-null but empty,
ignore it. This allows a user to just press enter at an OPIE
prompt and still get a Unix prompt.
I am not sure I understand this fully, could you
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We can speed up pam_opie by saving one opielookup() call in this way:
True, except you forgot to call opieunlock() :)
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 18:33:22 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We can speed up pam_opie by saving one opielookup() call in this way:
True, except you forgot to call opieunlock() :)
No, when opiechallenge() return != 0, no opieunlock() needed
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am not sure I understand this fully, could you please send two
typescripts (in the manner you do for login testing) with and without this
change?
Assuming no ~des/.opiealways,
- without the change:
des@des ~% login des
otp-md5 496 de6973 ext
Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Most people I know of that netboot boxes on Intel platforms now use
PXE.
But well, there are only two NICs that support PXE, aren't there? In
particular, there's nothing cheap (i. e. = USD 10) you could use in
conjunction with an old junk ISA NIC people
Hello,
anyone running a recent -current
successfuly with the i4b ISDN drivers?
I built -current around christmas,
and had to applay a patch posted here
in October to make a kernel with i4b
drivers.
However I don't manage to establish
a kernel ppp connection to my provider
since then.
Regards,
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tom Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Warner, do you have any clues on how to get the modem half of this
: card working again?
You'd have to a) fix the pci attachment or b) wait until the puc
driver hits the tree. Chances are fixing the pci attachment
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
No, when opiechallenge() return != 0, no opieunlock() needed because
nothing is locked. Look at opiechallenge() sources, it not makes
lock on error.
Oh, you're right. I wasn't thinking.
Here are the (hopefully) final patches. Any final
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 18:46:37 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Assuming no ~des/.opiealways,
- without the change:
des@des ~% login des
otp-md5 496 de6973 ext
Password: enter
otp-md5 496 de6973 ext
Password [echo on]: enter
Login incorrect
login: argh!
It looks like right
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 18:53:34 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Here are the (hopefully) final patches. Any final objections before I
commit the lot?
Excepting get_pass() thing cause 3 prompts again, all looks right.
--
Andrey A. Chernov
http://ache.pp.ru/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 21:13:19 +0300, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 18:46:37 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Assuming no ~des/.opiealways,
- without the change:
des@des ~% login des
otp-md5 496 de6973 ext
Password: enter
otp-md5 496 de6973 ext
Here are the (hopefully) final patches. Any final objections before I
commit the lot?
According to EyeBall Mk1, this is fine! :-)
I haven't extensively tested the code, but the methods used and the
design are very sound, I believe.
M
--
o Mark Murray
\_ FreeBSD Services Limited
this machine has never been 3.x.
the binaries worked fine up until about 5 months ago.
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, M. Warner Losh wrote:
Some -current binaries can have this, but recompiling usually fixes
it. Also, I have some older 3.x binaries that I had to install
COMPAT3 to get working.
no, should I?
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
and I've made world a lot of times like that.
and if I do it by hand as sugested, it doesn;t make any difference
either.
Just a guess - have you removed existing old libraries from /usr/lib?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 21:24:25 +0300, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
- without the change:
des@des ~% login des
otp-md5 496 de6973 ext
Password: enter
otp-md5 496 de6973 ext
Password [echo on]: enter
Login incorrect
login: argh!
If OPIE is configured to allow Unix
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It looks like right variant. _By_default_ OPIE user is unable to enter
Unix password. You need to add
permit your.ip.addr 255.255.255.255
line to /etc/opieaccess to _allow_ Unix passwords on your machine.
Which I do...
# grep '^[^#]'
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 19:40:40 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Which I do...
# grep '^[^#]' /etc/opieaccess
permit 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255
permit 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.0
Really there must be only address resolved from gethostname() call,
what f.e. su sets for PAM_RHOST on localhost.
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 19:40:40 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
# grep '^[^#]' /etc/opieaccess
permit 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255
permit 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.0
Really there must be only address resolved from gethostname() call,
what f.e. su
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 18:32:43 +0300, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 16:11:47 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Back to your subj.: It breaks, at least, M$ Windows OPIE/Skey generators
which do auto-paste when keyword (Password) is found.
Good point. OPIE
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
it gives impression that no normal Unix password can be typed at this
point.
...which I initially thought was the case, but it's not.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe
Well, now almost all things work as they expected to be, only one thing
left is promised by Mark srandomdev() fix.
Thanks to all, especially to Dag-Erling.
--
Andrey A. Chernov
http://ache.pp.ru/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Julian Elischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: this machine has never been 3.x.
: the binaries worked fine up until about 5 months ago.
All bets are off if it ran -current. You need to rebuild everything.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:54:38PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Julian Elischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: this machine has never been 3.x.
: the binaries worked fine up until about 5 months ago.
All bets are off if it ran -current. You need to
--- libpam/Makefile.old Thu Dec 13 12:26:56 2001
+++ libpam/Makefile Mon Jan 21 23:09:16 2002
@@ -80,6 +80,7 @@
.endif
STATIC_MODULES+= ${MODOBJDIR}/pam_nologin/libpam_nologin.a
STATIC_MODULES+= ${MODOBJDIR}/pam_opie/libpam_opie.a
+STATIC_MODULES+=
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks to all, especially to Dag-Erling.
Thanks to *you* for pointing out and explaining the issues, submitting
patches, and reviewing and testing mine. I'm sorry we got off on such
a bad foot this weekend; I feel that the exchanges we've had
I reinstalled the 4.x compat libs but it didn't make any difference.:-(
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
David W. Chapman Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:54:38PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: In message:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 09:19:50PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks to all, especially to Dag-Erling.
Thanks to *you* for pointing out and explaining the issues, submitting
patches, and reviewing and testing mine. I'm sorry we got off on
* Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] [020121 12:20] wrote:
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks to all, especially to Dag-Erling.
Thanks to *you* for pointing out and explaining the issues, submitting
patches, and reviewing and testing mine. I'm sorry we got off on such
step 8
a summary for the rest of us?
I got lost there in the middle soemwhere.
On 21 Jan 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Andrey A. Chernov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks to all, especially to Dag-Erling.
Thanks to *you* for pointing out and explaining the issues, submitting
patches,
Julian Elischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
step 8
a summary for the rest of us?
I got lost there in the middle soemwhere.
http://people.freebsd.org/~des/diary/2002.html#2002-01-21
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe
Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 11:43:28PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Once you guys have this all hammered out, are you going to
integrate PAM and Kerberos? 8-) 8-) 8-).
In what way do you mean?
In the way that the author of the PAM architecture from Sun
spoke at
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:48:39PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 11:43:28PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Once you guys have this all hammered out, are you going to
integrate PAM and Kerberos? 8-) 8-) 8-).
In what way do you mean?
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:24:44 -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
step 8
a summary for the rest of us?
I got lost there in the middle soemwhere.
Most shortest one, I think:
1) OPIE auth now works as required.
2) OPIE is turned on by default.
Both cases affects only users registered in OPIE
Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Does anybody mind if I change the pam_opie(8) prompt from Password:
to Response:? I think users might be slightly confused when they
enter an incorrect or empty response twice and get a new Password:
prompt and don't realize it's the pam_unix(8) prompt.
See my
Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 03:18:32PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Does anybody mind if I change the pam_opie(8) prompt from Password:
to Response:? I think users might be slightly confused when they
enter an incorrect or empty response twice and get a new
Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
In the way that the author of the PAM architecture from Sun
spoke at the Silicon Valley BSD User's Group meeting,
Do you have a reference, or do we have to guess what you are talking
about? :-)
I have my memory of the talk he gave, which included the idea
that
memset() in opiechallenge() really is not needed because it is the very
first thing opielookup() does being entered, i.e. look at this:
int opielookup FUNCTION((opie, principal), struct opie *opie AND char *principal)
{
int i;
memset(opie, 0, sizeof(struct opie));
...
And then the patch
On 2002-01-21 09:22:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
5) In -current would it be possible to have a few command line
switches added to certain userland utilities? I noticed -h made it
into `ls` now, but `cp` still doesn't have -a or -x which I used to
use all the time in Linux. I know -a isn't a
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Julian Elischer wrote:
has NO effect whatsoever.
The only thign I can do is recompile any package that has thos problem.
but sometimes it's hard finding which package needs to be recomiled.
thoughts?
You might also need compat3. I was quite surprised at the set
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Julian Elischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: I reinstalled the 4.x compat libs but it didn't make any difference.:-(
Then you must have -current binaries that are too old. You will have
to rebuild them.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
I've got a machine with 4G of RAM, and I'm trying to test all the RAM out
to make sure it's okay.
I've tried doing buildworlds, but never end up using more than 1G of RAM on
cache, etc.
I've got -current and -stable on it, and I've tried making an MFS
filesystem under -stable. I can't seem to
On Monday 21 January 2002 10:20 pm, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
I've got a machine with 4G of RAM, and I'm trying to test all the RAM out
to make sure it's okay.
I've tried doing buildworlds, but never end up using more than 1G of RAM on
cache, etc.
I've got -current and -stable on it, and
On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 22:18:51 -0700, Samuel J.Greear wrote:
On Monday 21 January 2002 10:20 pm, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
I've got a machine with 4G of RAM, and I'm trying to test all the RAM out
to make sure it's okay.
I've tried doing buildworlds, but never end up using more than 1G
It seems Mike Brancato wrote:
I'm running -current and have a Maxtor 160GB hdd hooked to the promise
ata133 card that came with it it will flake out for no apparent
reason. any clues? maybe bad hardware? anyone else getting these?
ad4: READ command timeout tag=0 serv=0 - resetting
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2002-01-21 09:22:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
5) In -current would it be possible to have a few command line
switches added to certain userland utilities? I noticed -h made it
into `ls` now, but `cp` still doesn't have -a or -x which I used to
use all the
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Kenneth D. Merry writes:
Is there a way, under -current or -stable, to make a true RAMdisk that is
around 2GB in size?
Possibly. If you take the detour around a preloaded image for the md(4)
driver it should be possible.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since
While I realize you can't emulate the switches on any command on any os, I
found a few linuxism's missing.
Eg: I find it illogical, that route can change, and also display the
route to a single host, but route can not display the entire route table.
In linux it is simply route, in windows it is
91 matches
Mail list logo
