On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Stephen Hocking-Senior Programmer PGS Tensor Perth wrote:
I'm attempting to build the X11 libs with the thread safety stuff (I beleive
Linux can already be built like this) and have discovered when linking that we
don't have the getpwnam_r getpwuid_r functions in out
On Thu, 12 Aug 1999 11:41:31 -0400, "Brian F. Feldman" wrote:
NetBSD's test(1) utility has this (-nt and -ot). We should probably
merge in their changes.
Hmm... this is in pdksh too...
Don't go there. :-)
Ciao,
Sheldon.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:36:24 +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
It would be nice, but there are portability issues.
Hi Peter,
I'm only replying to your mail because you're the last person to mention
portability as a case againsdt NetBSD's test(1).
Just how many other platforms need to support an
Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Louis A. Mamakos wrote:
[lost attribution]
That IS a violation of the standard, since A records are not valid
for hosts in in-addr.arpa.
And next I suppose you'll tell me that PTR records are not valid
outsize of the IN-ADDR.ARPA portion of the DNS namespace?
Can anyone tell me how to modify the config file to build a kernel that
creates dump image whenever it panics. Currently I have to use dumpon
command after system bootup. But this command does not work when the
panic happens during the bootup time, i.e., when you have no chance to
issue the
Tony Finch wrote:
Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Louis A. Mamakos wrote:
[lost attribution]
That IS a violation of the standard, since A records are not valid
for hosts in in-addr.arpa.
And next I suppose you'll tell me that PTR records are not valid
outsize of the IN-ADDR.ARPA
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 09:16:09 -0400, Jamie Howard wrote:
I saw someone say that anything NetBSD did in the name of portability must
be right (in the test thread). :)
Close, but what I said was more along the lines that following NetBSD's
footsteps on issues relating to portability is
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
Close, but what I said was more along the lines that following NetBSD's
footsteps on issues relating to portability is _seldom_ a bad idea.
I was close enough that you know the exact quote so I think I did alright.
Back to the point, just stick it in
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:36:24 +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
It would be nice, but there are portability issues.
Hi Peter,
I'm only replying to your mail because you're the last person to mention
portability as a case againsdt NetBSD's
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Jamie Howard wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
Close, but what I said was more along the lines that following NetBSD's
footsteps on issues relating to portability is _seldom_ a bad idea.
I was close enough that you know the exact quote so I think I
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 12:50:54 -0400, "Brian F. Feldman" wrote:
I fully agree with this. If it can be cleanly added to the current test(1)
(which it can), we should have it, even if it were JUST for the sake of
portability.
Ah, but I'm not proposing that we add new functionality to the
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 12:50:54 -0400, "Brian F. Feldman" wrote:
I fully agree with this. If it can be cleanly added to the current test(1)
(which it can), we should have it, even if it were JUST for the sake of
portability.
Ah, but I'm not
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Zhihui Zhang wrote:
Can anyone tell me how to modify the config file to build a kernel that
creates dump image whenever it panics. Currently I have to use dumpon
command after system bootup. But this command does not work when the
panic happens during the bootup time,
How exactly do you plan to get this to the FreeBSD internationsl
server that has the crypto repository?
Sander
There is no love, no good, no happiness and no future -
all these are just illusions.
On Thu, 12 Aug 1999, Nick Sayer wrote:
Ok. I have put up a rough cut
Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nothing in either RFC that you quoted, or any of your examples
contradicted my actual point, which was that PTR records are not
valid outside of in-addr.arpa name space.
AFAICT the second example I gave has a valid PTR record outside
in-addr.arpa. To give you a
Narvi wrote:
How exactly do you plan to get this to the FreeBSD internationsl
server that has the crypto repository?
The short answer is that I don't.
Unfortunately the trick that PGP used of publishing it in a book and
exporting
that won't work anymore, because I believe the commerce
RFC 1035 isn't the only RFC under this aspect. While in RFC 1035
the host specification is a "should", in other RFC's it's a "must"
They are:
RFC 1123 Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Application and Support
which has a pointer to
RFC 952DOD INTERNET HOST TABLE SPECIFICATION
So,
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Zhihui Zhang wrote:
Can anyone tell me how to modify the config file to build a kernel that
creates dump image whenever it panics. Currently I have to use dumpon
command after system bootup. But this command does not
:On Thu, Aug 12, 1999 at 11:16:23PM -0700, Gregory Sutter wrote:
: What is the (default) maximum number of simultanous NFS mounts in
: FreeBSD 2.2.8 and 3.2?
:
: I was looking at 3.2 and it appears that 63 is the max, and this is
: tunable with kernel config option NFS_MUIDHASHSIZ. Is this
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Nick Sayer wrote:
I originally obtained SRA code from a University in Germany. I obtained
my implementation of IDEA from PGP. In fact, I used idea.[ch] and #if
0'ed
out stuff that's not needed.
Couldn't you work the code so it obtains all
This is why people should start emailing asking for a dual-license that
would support incorporation into FreeBSD.
good luck, the SGI crowd are very Linux-oriented.
Has anyone mentioned to them that they will be unable to incorporate
changes made to the GPL'ed version of XFS back into
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 22:49:14 + (GMT)
Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone mentioned to them that they will be unable to incorporate
changes made to the GPL'ed version of XFS back into the IRIX version
of XFS, without IRIX becoming GPL'ed?
SGI is plummetting to their
As I parse the SGI PR-speak, IRIX is to be folded into Linux over time in
one massive penguin love-in. This will take place at some point after
IRIX has been disencunbered of it's ATT/Univel/SCO whatever... It
really is a good time to be alive.
-Original Message-
From: Terry Lambert
On Wed, Aug 11, 1999 at 12:07:41AM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
The use of /stand/sysinstall to do a live upgrade has always been
discouraged, though it's not outright disallowed since I believe in
every man's right to blow his feet off if he really wants to.
Nonetheless, for the
Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone mentioned to them that they will be unable to incorporate
changes made to the GPL'ed version of XFS back into the IRIX version
of XFS, without IRIX becoming GPL'ed?
That is not correct: if SGI only use code that they have full
ownership of in
I am currently conducting a thorough study of the VFS subsystem
in preparation for an all-out effort to port SGI's XFS filesystem to
FreeBSD 4.x at such time as SGI gives up the code. Matt Dillon
has written in hackers- that the VFS subsystem is presently not
well understood by any of the
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 19:49:10 -0400 (EDT)
James Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did, they have a feedback form I filled out yesterday. I mentioned that
and that if they dual licensed the code, it could be used by the entire
free software community, not just the hip Linux crowd and also
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Jason Thorpe wrote:
I did, they have a feedback form I filled out yesterday. I mentioned that
and that if they dual licensed the code, it could be used by the entire
free software community, not just the hip Linux crowd and also mentioned
that a great many in
Dan Moschuk wrote:
Does anyone have any issues with merging the new bind resolver API into
libc?
Well, Terry does, though I don't quite recall his reasoning. :-)
Notice, he objects the way FreeBSD is today, with the bind resolver
API inside libc.
I object because it perpetuates a
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 19:49:10 -0400 (EDT)
James Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did, they have a feedback form I filled out yesterday. I mentioned that
and that if they dual licensed the code, it could be used by the entire
free software community, not just the hip Linux crowd
What is the (default) maximum number of simultanous NFS mounts in
FreeBSD 2.2.8 and 3.2?
I was looking at 3.2 and it appears that 63 is the max, and this is
tunable with kernel config option NFS_MUIDHASHSIZ. Is this correct?
What is the maximum possible setting?
Last, where could I have found
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Stephen Hocking-Senior Programmer PGS Tensor Perth wrote:
I'm attempting to build the X11 libs with the thread safety stuff (I beleive
Linux can already be built like this) and have discovered when linking that
we
don't have the getpwnam_r getpwuid_r functions in out
On Thu, 12 Aug 1999 11:41:31 -0400, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
NetBSD's test(1) utility has this (-nt and -ot). We should probably
merge in their changes.
Hmm... this is in pdksh too...
Don't go there. :-)
Ciao,
Sheldon.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:36:24 +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
It would be nice, but there are portability issues.
Hi Peter,
I'm only replying to your mail because you're the last person to mention
portability as a case againsdt NetBSD's test(1).
Just how many other platforms need to support an
Doug d...@gorean.org wrote:
Louis A. Mamakos wrote:
[lost attribution]
That IS a violation of the standard, since A records are not valid
for hosts in in-addr.arpa.
And next I suppose you'll tell me that PTR records are not valid
outsize of the IN-ADDR.ARPA portion of the DNS namespace?
On Thu, 12 Aug 1999, Jamie Howard wrote:
How would those functions which also exist in libc (or possibly other
libraries, I don't know) be handled?
Just following up to myself here, NetBSD has a getopt_long() in libc
ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/NetBSD-current/src/lib/libc/stdlib/
I saw
Arun Sharma writes:
The daemons which are involved in freeing up pages during low memory
conditions qualify as system daemons. Making sure that these daemons
don't block avoids the deadlock.
-Arun
The second solution involves a little more than that. Such as
blessing normal jobs
Hi folks,
The pdksh-derived test(1) used by NetBSD and OpenBSD has made it through
a ``make world'' and package run on my box. It passes the regression
tests supplied with our own test(1) in exactly the same way as our own
test(1) does, and shows no noticeable performance difference.
I've
Ok. I have put up a rough cut of my proposed src/crypto/telnet stuff
with SRA
authentication and IDEA encryption. It requires the libutil from 3.2 (or
better),
but it appears to work pretty well.
Please don't download it if you're outside the US.
But if you are in the US, you can grab it from
On Thu, Aug 12, 1999 at 04:19:59PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Ruslan Ermilov r...@freebsd.org writes:
Hmm, looking to the p5-* ports, I can't figure out what would be the
appropriate PATH component for /usr/local/lib/perl/*/man manpath.
Do you have an idea?
You can't use
Can anyone tell me how to modify the config file to build a kernel that
creates dump image whenever it panics. Currently I have to use dumpon
command after system bootup. But this command does not work when the
panic happens during the bootup time, i.e., when you have no chance to
issue the
Tony Finch wrote:
Doug d...@gorean.org wrote:
Louis A. Mamakos wrote:
[lost attribution]
That IS a violation of the standard, since A records are not valid
for hosts in in-addr.arpa.
And next I suppose you'll tell me that PTR records are not valid
outsize of the IN-ADDR.ARPA
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 09:16:09 -0400, Jamie Howard wrote:
I saw someone say that anything NetBSD did in the name of portability must
be right (in the test thread). :)
Close, but what I said was more along the lines that following NetBSD's
footsteps on issues relating to portability is
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
Close, but what I said was more along the lines that following NetBSD's
footsteps on issues relating to portability is _seldom_ a bad idea.
I was close enough that you know the exact quote so I think I did alright.
Back to the point, just stick it in
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:36:24 +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
It would be nice, but there are portability issues.
Hi Peter,
I'm only replying to your mail because you're the last person to mention
portability as a case againsdt NetBSD's test(1).
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Jamie Howard wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
Close, but what I said was more along the lines that following NetBSD's
footsteps on issues relating to portability is _seldom_ a bad idea.
I was close enough that you know the exact quote so I think I
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 12:52:05 -0400, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
Direct veto by core member (Jordan) prevents this. I really think it
should be in libcompat, the more I consider every option.
Regardless of what Jordan says, you should do your best to put it where
most other folks put it.
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 12:50:54 -0400, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
I fully agree with this. If it can be cleanly added to the current test(1)
(which it can), we should have it, even if it were JUST for the sake of
portability.
Ah, but I'm not proposing that we add new functionality to the existing
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 12:50:54 -0400, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
I fully agree with this. If it can be cleanly added to the current test(1)
(which it can), we should have it, even if it were JUST for the sake of
portability.
Ah, but I'm not
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Zhihui Zhang wrote:
Can anyone tell me how to modify the config file to build a kernel that
creates dump image whenever it panics. Currently I have to use dumpon
command after system bootup. But this command does not work when the
panic happens during the bootup time,
How exactly do you plan to get this to the FreeBSD internationsl
server that has the crypto repository?
Sander
There is no love, no good, no happiness and no future -
all these are just illusions.
On Thu, 12 Aug 1999, Nick Sayer wrote:
Ok. I have put up a rough cut of
Doug d...@gorean.org wrote:
Nothing in either RFC that you quoted, or any of your examples
contradicted my actual point, which was that PTR records are not
valid outside of in-addr.arpa name space.
AFAICT the second example I gave has a valid PTR record outside
in-addr.arpa. To give you a more
Narvi wrote:
How exactly do you plan to get this to the FreeBSD internationsl
server that has the crypto repository?
The short answer is that I don't.
Unfortunately the trick that PGP used of publishing it in a book and
exporting
that won't work anymore, because I believe the commerce
RFC 1035 isn't the only RFC under this aspect. While in RFC 1035
the host specification is a should, in other RFC's it's a must
They are:
RFC 1123 Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Application and Support
which has a pointer to
RFC 952DOD INTERNET HOST TABLE SPECIFICATION
So, underscores
On Thu, Aug 12, 1999 at 11:16:23PM -0700, Gregory Sutter wrote:
What is the (default) maximum number of simultanous NFS mounts in
FreeBSD 2.2.8 and 3.2?
I was looking at 3.2 and it appears that 63 is the max, and this is
tunable with kernel config option NFS_MUIDHASHSIZ. Is this correct?
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Zhihui Zhang wrote:
Can anyone tell me how to modify the config file to build a kernel that
creates dump image whenever it panics. Currently I have to use dumpon
command after system bootup. But this command does not
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Nick Sayer wrote:
I originally obtained SRA code from a University in Germany. I obtained
my implementation of IDEA from PGP. In fact, I used idea.[ch] and #if
0'ed
out stuff that's not needed.
Couldn't you work the code so it obtains all its' encryption functions
from
:On Thu, Aug 12, 1999 at 11:16:23PM -0700, Gregory Sutter wrote:
: What is the (default) maximum number of simultanous NFS mounts in
: FreeBSD 2.2.8 and 3.2?
:
: I was looking at 3.2 and it appears that 63 is the max, and this is
: tunable with kernel config option NFS_MUIDHASHSIZ. Is this
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Nick Sayer wrote:
I originally obtained SRA code from a University in Germany. I obtained
my implementation of IDEA from PGP. In fact, I used idea.[ch] and #if
0'ed
out stuff that's not needed.
Couldn't you work the code so it obtains all
I'm attempting to build the X11 libs with the thread safety stuff (I beleive
Linux can already be built like this) and have discovered when linking that
we don't have the getpwnam_r getpwuid_r functions in out libc_r. Is anyone
planning on adding these?
I asked the same question a while
This is why people should start emailing asking for a dual-license that
would support incorporation into FreeBSD.
good luck, the SGI crowd are very Linux-oriented.
Has anyone mentioned to them that they will be unable to incorporate
changes made to the GPL'ed version of XFS back into the
This is why people should start emailing asking for a dual-license that
would support incorporation into FreeBSD.
good luck, the SGI crowd are very Linux-oriented.
I had some quite promising discussions with several of the SGI folks
with regard to getting information on their new
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 22:49:14 + (GMT)
Terry Lambert tlamb...@primenet.com wrote:
Has anyone mentioned to them that they will be unable to incorporate
changes made to the GPL'ed version of XFS back into the IRIX version
of XFS, without IRIX becoming GPL'ed?
SGI is plummetting to their
As I parse the SGI PR-speak, IRIX is to be folded into Linux over time in
one massive penguin love-in. This will take place at some point after
IRIX has been disencunbered of it's ATT/Univel/SCO whatever... It
really is a good time to be alive.
-Original Message-
From: Terry Lambert
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Terry Lambert wrote:
Has anyone mentioned to them that they will be unable to incorporate
changes made to the GPL'ed version of XFS back into the IRIX version
of XFS, without IRIX becoming GPL'ed?
Given that they say they're dropping IRIX and going with Linux, I don't
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Terry Lambert wrote:
Has anyone mentioned to them that they will be unable to incorporate
changes made to the GPL'ed version of XFS back into the IRIX version
of XFS, without IRIX becoming GPL'ed?
I did, they have a feedback form I filled out yesterday. I mentioned that
On Wed, Aug 11, 1999 at 12:07:41AM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
The use of /stand/sysinstall to do a live upgrade has always been
discouraged, though it's not outright disallowed since I believe in
every man's right to blow his feet off if he really wants to.
Nonetheless, for the expected
Terry Lambert tlamb...@primenet.com wrote:
Has anyone mentioned to them that they will be unable to incorporate
changes made to the GPL'ed version of XFS back into the IRIX version
of XFS, without IRIX becoming GPL'ed?
That is not correct: if SGI only use code that they have full
ownership of in
On 13 Aug, Bill Studenmund wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Terry Lambert wrote:
Has anyone mentioned to them that they will be unable to incorporate
changes made to the GPL'ed version of XFS back into the IRIX version
of XFS, without IRIX becoming GPL'ed?
Given that they say they're dropping
I am currently conducting a thorough study of the VFS subsystem
in preparation for an all-out effort to port SGI's XFS filesystem to
FreeBSD 4.x at such time as SGI gives up the code. Matt Dillon
has written in hackers- that the VFS subsystem is presently not
well understood by any of the
Has anyone mentioned to them that they will be unable to incorporate
changes made to the GPL'ed version of XFS back into the IRIX version
of XFS, without IRIX becoming GPL'ed?
That is not correct: if SGI only use code that they have full
ownership of in IRIX then they can distribute it
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 19:49:10 -0400 (EDT)
James Howard howar...@wam.umd.edu wrote:
I did, they have a feedback form I filled out yesterday. I mentioned that
and that if they dual licensed the code, it could be used by the entire
free software community, not just the hip Linux crowd and
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999, Jason Thorpe wrote:
I did, they have a feedback form I filled out yesterday. I mentioned that
and that if they dual licensed the code, it could be used by the entire
free software community, not just the hip Linux crowd and also mentioned
that a great many in the
Dan Moschuk wrote:
Does anyone have any issues with merging the new bind resolver API into
libc?
Well, Terry does, though I don't quite recall his reasoning. :-)
Notice, he objects the way FreeBSD is today, with the bind resolver
API inside libc.
I object because it perpetuates a
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 19:37:42 -0700 (PDT)
Kris Kennaway k...@hub.freebsd.org wrote:
So, if they were to simply put a BSD license on the code, then everyone
would be happy, and there wouldn't be any of the dual-license confusion.
Unfortunately, by BSD-licensing the XFS code, SGI would
David E. Cross writes:
A friend writing some portable network tunneling software ran into an
interesting thing... when you specify IP_HDRINCL with SOCK_RAW, and
IPPROTO_RAW you need to construct the outgoing packet in host byte order.
This seems wonderfully inconsistent with all of the
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 19:49:10 -0400 (EDT)
James Howard howar...@wam.umd.edu wrote:
I did, they have a feedback form I filled out yesterday. I mentioned that
and that if they dual licensed the code, it could be used by the entire
free software community, not just the hip Linux crowd
77 matches
Mail list logo
