On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 09:52:17PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So why not have GNOME/KDE create mount points for the user if
vfs.usermount is 1?
pardon my ignorance, but how any of those methods described earlier may
be superior to simply using sudo?
Using sudo is a hack? :)
--
Same here. As mentioned in the original message, I can use the mouse
to open a new window under firefox. The new window will accept
keyboard input, the old one won't. It's almost as if it's deadlocking
on input.
Reminder: my final question was how do I go about debugging this
problem?.
Does
I need to understand and write keymaps.
I have read kbdcontrol(1) and kbdmap(5), but these two is too superficial.
Is there another document?
These manuals do not explain for example:
How to make Alt+a acting as sequence Meta a?
Alt+a acts in other way, than a pressed after the key marked as
Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
The focus management and the highlighting of the window manager
decoration are not physically connected in any way, so a bug in the
window manager might cause it to do the highlighting but forget to
give the focus to the application.
But mouse focus and
Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Donations can be sent by paypal to [EMAIL PROTECTED]; if you would
prefer to send a cheque (which is probably only worthwhile for cheques
in Canadian or US dollars), please contact me by email to obtain my
mailing address. In either case, please let
Ian G [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In terms of cross-border payments, this is always
difficult. You might want to look at one of the
cross-border specialists like Kagi.com or
moneybookers.com or the digital gold currencies.
OK, thanks. But it's not only the Colin issue. The FreeBSD project
From: Stefan Sperling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What are admins supposed to do on systems with more than, say, a hundred
users. Having to add a line to /etc/fstab for every user is of course
scriptable, but that does not make it less insane.
Would it make sense to be able to specify a group in fstab?
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 09:52:17PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So why not have GNOME/KDE create mount points for the user if
vfs.usermount is 1?
pardon my ignorance, but how any of those methods described earlier may
be superior to
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 01:37:11PM +0100, Jan Grant wrote:
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 09:52:17PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So why not have GNOME/KDE create mount points for the user if
vfs.usermount is 1?
pardon my ignorance, but
It is my pleasure and honor to announce the availability of
the unionfs patchset-10.
Patchset-10:
For 7-current
http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/unionfs-p10.diff
For 6.x
http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/unionfs6-p10.diff
Changes in unionfs-p10.diff
-
On Wed, 5 Apr 2006, Stefan Sperling wrote:
I wasn't serious. Sudo is fine by me as well. However, having something that
is in the base system (and not in ports) to allow user mounts would be neat.
Still, KDE and GNOME and even xorg are in ports as well, so that point is
not a really strong
On 4/4/06, Lutz Boehne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
But when the program uses the libc I have more RET than call ...
What's the good way to find function calls and return ?
I'm doing something similar at the moment, utilizing the Branch Single
Stepping feature available in most x86 CPUs
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 10:00:00AM -0500, Sergey Babkin wrote:
Would it make sense to be able to specify a group in fstab?
Then the users can be simply given membership of this
group to mount the devices.
Why not just assume allowable users are in the operator group. Isn't
this what that
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 10:46:59PM +0900, Daichi GOTO wrote:
It is my pleasure and honor to announce the availability of
the unionfs patchset-10.
Patchset-10:
For 7-current
http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/unionfs-p10.diff
For 6.x
Hi,
I'm having a odd behavior while using geom_mirror.
I have the following situation:
- RAID1 with 2 SATA disks
# gmirror status
NameStatus Components
mirror/home0 COMPLETE ad2
ad3
- home0 as /home
# df -h
Filesystem SizeUsed Avail
On Tuesday 04 April 2006 06:40, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On Tue, 2006-Apr-04 11:12:03 +0100, Khaled Hussain wrote:
Why does everyone talk about dump+restore as a pair? I thought it was
possible just to dump a filesystem to a different hard disk i.e.
dump -0a -f /dev/ad2 /
It is. But /dev/ad2
On Wed, 2006-Apr-05 12:14:29 -0500, Rick C. Petty wrote:
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 10:00:00AM -0500, Sergey Babkin wrote:
Would it make sense to be able to specify a group in fstab?
Then the users can be simply given membership of this
group to mount the devices.
Why not just assume allowable
On Thu, 6 Apr 2006, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On Wed, 2006-Apr-05 12:14:29 -0500, Rick C. Petty wrote:
If not operator, then maybe one configurable group, defaulting to operator.
Sounds like a good idea.
--
Peter Jeremy
What group do NFS and SMBFS shares belong to?
Mike Silby Silbersack
On Wed, 2006-Apr-05 14:53:55 -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
boot2 is located in the (I think) sectors 1-15 of partition a.
Actually, boot1 + boot2 occupy sectors 0,2-15 of the bootable slice (the
a partition starts at the start of the slice to be confusing) with the
actual disklabel table in sector
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 15:15, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On Wed, 2006-Apr-05 14:53:55 -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
boot2 is located in the (I think) sectors 1-15 of partition a.
Actually, boot1 + boot2 occupy sectors 0,2-15 of the bootable slice (the
a partition starts at the start of the slice
On 30. mar. 2006, at 22.20, Colin Percival wrote:
Slightly more than three years ago, I released FreeBSD Update, my
first
major contribution to FreeBSD. Since then, I have become a FreeBSD
committer, joined the FreeBSD Security Team, released Portsnap, and
become the FreeBSD Security
There are some security problems with kernel-level script
setuid execution which discourage from using it. The standard
recommendation is to write a binary setuid wrapper for
each script needed. But maybe it's better to use one simple,
well reviewed and verified setuid wrapper for all common
I came across the fallowing website:
http://scan.coverity.com/
Looks like they check open source projects for source quality.
They Have the fallowing listed:
Project | Current # | Original # | Lines of Code | Defects /
Defects Defects KLOC
23 matches
Mail list logo
