On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
Hi, i have a question.
Why 'dd' does not seek over 'char' devs (specifically raw disk
partitions).
Not all character devices support seeking. So, we work with the LCD...
Sorry, I don't like this either. It would be better, maybe, just
But I have a valid point: can we do something better than posting a SIGKILL
to the largest process?
Brian Fundakowski Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___ ___
gr...@freebsd.org _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve!_ __ | _ \._ \ |) |
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, John Polstra wrote:
In article pine.bsf.4.10.9907131042310.76301-100...@janus.syracuse.net,
Brian F. Feldman gr...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
couldn't we first try lseek and only do the reads on char devs where
the lseek fails
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
:But I have a valid point: can we do something better than posting a SIGKILL
:to the largest process?
:
: Brian Fundakowski Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___ ___
: gr...@freebsd.org _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \
We could
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Ian Dowse wrote:
In message pine.bsf.4.10.9907130946220.76301-100...@janus.syracuse.net,
Bria
n F. Feldman writes:
On 13 Jul 1999, Ville-Pertti Keinonen wrote:
gr...@freebsd.org (Brian F. Feldman) writes:
It's out with the bad, in with the good. Pidentd code
We don't _need_ pidentd anymore. It will load down a system more than
the inetd's implementation of ident will. Therefore, pidentd should be
phased out. Other than that, pidentd should be using
http://www.FreeBSD.org/~green/freebsd4.c and not linking with libkvm.
Brian Fundakowski Feldman _
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
There are other ways. For example, even if a user account is resource
limited, root processes (such as sendmail, popper, identd, and so forth)
are not. Attacks against these servers generally result in very high
loads and sometimes
On Mon, 12 Jul 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999 12:47:30 MST, Doug wrote:
Finally, Brian might want to search the bugtraq archives before
he commits anything. There have been quite a few identd related
discussions, and it would be points in our favor if we didn't
On Mon, 12 Jul 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999 12:47:30 MST, Doug wrote:
Finally, Brian might want to search the bugtraq archives before
he commits anything. There have been quite a few identd related
discussions, and it would be points in our favor if we didn't
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999 01:49:59 -0400, "Brian F. Feldman" wrote:
inetd already has the built-in equivalent to that. Maybe it's possible
to make a REAL ident (*cough* the one I wrote) an option, inetd has
that service off
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Doug wrote:
3. Having a built in version of a "real" ident run out of inetd would be
*very* welcome by the people that need it. pidentd is a bloated, buggy pig.
Thank you. That's why I wrote it.
4. I agree with Sheldon that returning "real" responses by default would
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Brian F.
Feldman" writes:
: Good idea. I'll have it check to see that it's a regular file.
Make sure that you do this with the stat, open, fstat interlocking so
that there isn't a race here.
I have this f
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
On Sun, Jul 11, 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
I can manage C code much better than I can manage Perl code
and C is faster than Perl.
Trying to start ANOTHER holy war? :)
I meant that you don't have to compile/interpret/whatever-you
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Kevin Day wrote:
Is it worth it to write an identd for FreeBSD? With one sysctl added, it's
trivial to implement. If an identd would be desired, then should I make a
separate one, or rewrite the current inetd's internal identd shim? I
don't see a reason for
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999 01:49:59 -0400, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
inetd already has the built-in equivalent to that. Maybe it's possible
to make a REAL ident (*cough* the one I wrote) an option, inetd has
that service off by default.
That sounds
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Niall Smart wrote:
I don't see a point to that. However, I am finished. Please go to
http://www.FreeBSD.org/~green/ and get getcred.patch and inetd_ident.patch.
Hmm,
+#ifdef FAKEID
+ snprintf(fakeid_path, sizeof(fakeid_path), %s/.fakeid,
pw-pw_dir);
+
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Doug wrote:
3. Having a built in version of a real ident run out of inetd would be
*very* welcome by the people that need it. pidentd is a bloated, buggy pig.
Thank you. That's why I wrote it.
4. I agree with Sheldon that returning real responses by default would be
a
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
: 2. Most shell services do a good job of keeping ident reliable. They need
: to do that because most IRC networks heavily penalize clients that don't
: return any ident.
:
:This is changing. In the face of ${BIGNUM} Windoze boxes giving ident
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
On Sun, Jul 11, 1999, Tim Vanderhoek wrote:
On Sat, Jul 10, 1999 at 11:45:39PM -0500, Chris Costello wrote:
So far, it seems the functionality is the same. A tarball
is availible at http://www.calldei.com/~chris/rtfm.tar.gz
What was
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
In message pine.bsf.4.10.9907111408060.25135-100...@janus.syracuse.net
Brian F. Feldman writes:
: Good idea. I'll have it check to see that it's a regular file.
Make sure that you do this with the stat, open, fstat interlocking so
that there isn't
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
In message pine.bsf.4.10.9907112031200.31726-100...@janus.syracuse.net
Brian F. Feldman writes:
: I have this fixed in my latest code (on freefall of course). I did not
: use an original stat because that's pointless, as it adds another race
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
On Sun, Jul 11, 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
I can manage C code much better than I can manage Perl code
and C is faster than Perl.
Trying to start ANOTHER holy war? :)
I meant that you don't have to compile/interpret/whatever-you
Is it worth it to write an identd for FreeBSD? With one sysctl added, it's
trivial to implement. If an identd would be desired, then should I make a
separate one, or rewrite the current inetd's internal identd shim? I
don't see a reason for pidentd when we could have an identd built in by
me
On Sat, 10 Jul 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jul 1999 11:50:01 -0400, "Brian F. Feldman" wrote:
I don't see a reason for pidentd when we could have an identd built in
by me fixing inetd up, and it would all take up less space.
Hi Brian,
If you do end
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Kevin Day wrote:
Is it worth it to write an identd for FreeBSD? With one sysctl added, it's
trivial to implement. If an identd would be desired, then should I make a
separate one, or rewrite the current inetd's internal identd shim? I
don't see a reason for
Is it worth it to write an identd for FreeBSD? With one sysctl added, it's
trivial to implement. If an identd would be desired, then should I make a
separate one, or rewrite the current inetd's internal identd shim? I
don't see a reason for pidentd when we could have an identd built in by
me
On Sat, 10 Jul 1999, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jul 1999 11:50:01 -0400, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
I don't see a reason for pidentd when we could have an identd built in
by me fixing inetd up, and it would all take up less space.
Hi Brian,
If you do end up messing with inetd's
inetd already has the built-in equivalent to that. Maybe it's possible to
make a REAL ident (*cough* the one I wrote) an option, inetd has that service
off by default. Then the user can select one of two lines for a real ident
service or a fake one. I should probably take the FAKEID stuff out, or
On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Axis wrote:
I have been using *BSD* for around 3 years now. My problem is thatI have
always used the console for system administration duties. I really want to
put a kick *** system together to run X with all of the luxuries.
I have noticed there is not that much support
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
:Hmm, you're right. Arguably, it could return EINVAL. Actually, the
:man page documents this behavior, although it gets the 256 number wrong.
:
: If nfds is greater than the number of open files, select() is not
guaran-
: teed to examine
How do I set up a sysctl so that I may pass in a two pointers:
one to pass in some data
another to receive some data
? Is it possible? Otherwise, I think I should just do something with passing
in an arbitrary data buffer (pointer to, rather) which contains the data
necessary on
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, John Polstra wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
The application itself has to get involved if it wants to do async
name lookups, or async anything else, for that matter. Suppose you
do have an async thread to do hostname lookups as you propose. What
is the
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 1999, Doug wrote:
I'm confused about this script. How does it differ from 'apropos'?
It differs in that it _uses_ apropos (or 'whatis' if you
specify the -e flag), as well as a Texinfo search, as well as a
FAQ search, using
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
RTFM isn't a newby-apparent term. Name it help(1).
That would cause problems with bash users. They already have
a builtin help command.
Which can be disabled in the bash port before the next
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
Which can be disabled in the bash port before the next release...
No, that's a really stupid idea.
Thanks! But still, I don't think rtfm is very appropriate... Can we look
for something better, more obvious? Or perhaps it would be in the motd
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, John Polstra wrote:
In article pine.bsf.4.10.9907042155090.66085-100...@janus.syracuse.net,
The application itself has to get involved if it wants to do async
name lookups, or async anything else, for that matter. Suppose you
do have an async thread to do hostname
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 1999, Doug wrote:
I'm confused about this script. How does it differ from 'apropos'?
It differs in that it _uses_ apropos (or 'whatis' if you
specify the -e flag), as well as a Texinfo search, as well as a
FAQ search, using
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
RTFM isn't a newby-apparent term. Name it help(1).
That would cause problems with bash users. They already have
a builtin help command.
Which can be disabled in the bash port before the next release
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
Which can be disabled in the bash port before the next release...
No, that's a really stupid idea.
Thanks! But still, I don't think rtfm is very appropriate... Can we look
for something better, more obvious? Or perhaps it would be in the motd
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Doug wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
Which can be disabled in the bash port before the next release...
No, that's a really stupid idea.
Thanks! But still, I don't think rtfm is very
Don't ICBM coordinates require an elevation.
BTW, I'm at 38.75N 76.87W for the lovely list :)
Brian Fundakowski Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___ ___
gr...@freebsd.org _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve!_ __ | _ \._ \ |) |
On Sun, 4 Jul 1999, Archie Cobbs wrote:
Christopher Sedore writes:
A new, faster event notification system would be great. But don't forget
to include *all* events, not just file descriptor readability/writability.
I.e., signal delivery, child exit notification, maybe even support for
an
On Sun, 4 Jul 1999, Archie Cobbs wrote:
Long ago I was a Linux hacker before converting to FreeBSD. I thought
LILO was great and beat the heck out of FreeBSD's booteasy...
But now, we have the FreeBSD loader courtesy of the BTX toolchain and
the hard-working loader hackers :)
-Archie
On Sun, 4 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
I'm going to have a core team page worked on which has pictures and
brief bios, perhaps something by next week.
Such things may seem frivolous, but I it helps people relate a little
more directly to the core team if they can see what they look
On Sun, 4 Jul 1999, Archie Cobbs wrote:
Christopher Sedore writes:
A new, faster event notification system would be great. But don't forget
to include *all* events, not just file descriptor readability/writability.
I.e., signal delivery, child exit notification, maybe even support for
an
On Sun, 4 Jul 1999, Archie Cobbs wrote:
Long ago I was a Linux hacker before converting to FreeBSD. I thought
LILO was great and beat the heck out of FreeBSD's booteasy...
But now, we have the FreeBSD loader courtesy of the BTX toolchain and
the hard-working loader hackers :)
-Archie
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999, Doug wrote:
Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
[Bcc:ed to net, committers; please follow up on hackers]
Attached are patches for renaming 'pseudo-device bpfilter' to
'peudo-device bpf', courtesy of glimpse(1) and ed(1). LINT and GENERIC
build fine with these patches; I
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
On Jul 07, 1999 at 01:01:07AM -0400, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
As for new code, use whichever you are comfortable with. Personally, I
would recommend poll(), since it provides some added functionality
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
Thomas David Rivers wrote:
Is there any interest in supporting something like this in FreeBSD?
I'm volunteering to spend some cycles on this, but I don't want to go
to the effort if there's little chance that the work would be
integrated.
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999, Doug wrote:
Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
[Bcc:ed to net, committers; please follow up on hackers]
Attached are patches for renaming 'pseudo-device bpfilter' to
'peudo-device bpf', courtesy of glimpse(1) and ed(1). LINT and GENERIC
build fine with these patches; I
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999, Jim Pazarena wrote:
The following messages appear on the display as my FreeBSD machine is
booting.
The spelling of failed is totally incorrect, and it would sure be
nice to see the spelling corrected on a future release.
I don't see that in FreeBSD's HEAD, RELENG_2_2,
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
Brian F. Feldman wrote...
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999, Jim Pazarena wrote:
The following messages appear on the display as my FreeBSD machine is
booting.
The spelling of failed is totally incorrect, and it would sure be
nice to see
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999, Janie Dykes wrote:
When scouring through the threads - this one in particular caught my
attention. In my experience, which is still very new, I think all of
you make excellent points. For the most part, the novice/average
person, believes that hackers are malicious,
On Sun, 4 Jul 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
Brian F. Feldman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/Pine.LNX.3.95.990702160538.27513C-10
0...@crb.crb-web.com you write:
now supports the select() and poll() system calls. My question
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999, Anthony Kimball wrote:
Lizard has a tetris game built in for those long waits...
Now THAT is cool.
It's a better idea to not have people waiting for a long time.
Brian Fundakowski Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___ ___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ __ ___
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999, Anthony Kimball wrote:
Lizard has a tetris game built in for those long waits...
Now THAT is cool.
It's a better idea to not have people waiting for a long time.
Brian Fundakowski Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___ ___
gr...@freebsd.org _ __ ___
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/pine.lnx.3.95.990702160538.27513c-100...@crb.crb-web.com
you write:
now supports the select() and poll() system calls. My question is really one
of usage. Why would one us poll() over select()? Is select
On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Greg Lehey wrote:
On Monday, 28 June 1999 at 23:32:59 -0400, Amol Mohite wrote:
What I want to know is the exact position of these variables on the stack.
As I said, at the top.
and if anywhere I can find some data, on the exact compisoition of
the stcak, then it
On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
That's not true, Greg. I'm sure you of all people know that it (the
composition of address space) is described in "The Design and
Implementation of the 4.4BSD Operating System," even if things
are slightly different in FreeBS
On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Greg Lehey wrote:
On Monday, 28 June 1999 at 23:32:59 -0400, Amol Mohite wrote:
What I want to know is the exact position of these variables on the stack.
As I said, at the top.
and if anywhere I can find some data, on the exact compisoition of
the stcak, then it
On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
That's not true, Greg. I'm sure you of all people know that it (the
composition of address space) is described in The Design and
Implementation of the 4.4BSD Operating System, even if things
are slightly different in FreeBSD of today (especially
On Sun, 27 Jun 1999, Alexander Viro wrote:
As for the opening with no permissions - well, it would make *big* sense
if we could narrow down the API and move chown(), chmod(), etc. into libc
leaving f-variants in the kernel. Binary compatibility... Extreme variant
might include
On Fri, 25 Jun 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
static struct sockaddr_in servaddr;
This needs to be a valid structure in USER space, not kernel.
OK. I suspected as much. Question is: how do I open a connection from
KERNEL space?
You don't.
If you're really desperate to do
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Karl Denninger wrote:
On Thu, Jun 24, 1999 at 10:54:37AM -0700, Doug wrote:
We're adding some machines at work for (essentially) cgi
processing only. It was never considered to use anything less than 2 cpu
boxes, and the current round of testing is going so well
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Karl Denninger wrote:
A simple start would be to explicitly put a macro or call in each
syscall to push down the lock. That way people can move that
macro farther and farther down in the syscall code path, hopefully
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Karl Denninger wrote:
A simple start would be to explicitly put a macro or call in each
syscall to push down the lock
On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, Dan Seguin wrote:
Hi All.
I'm trying to create a system call that will burst a (pseudo) quick tcp
message out to a remote host every time that it is called. I've got the
system call all worked out as a kld, it loads and restores without a
hitch.
Good, you're
On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 4:39 PM +0930 6/23/99, Greg Lehey wrote:
On Tuesday, 22 June 1999 at 23:52:25 -0700, Mike Smith wrote:
[someone said]
| [someone said]
| Ok, so let's follow Microsoft's industry-leading documentation
| standards.
|
| He said
This belongs in freebsd-chat, if anywhere.
Brian Fundakowski Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___ ___
gr...@freebsd.org _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve!_ __ | _ \._ \ |) |
http://www.FreeBSD.org/ _ |___/___/___/
To
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 01:08:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brian F. Feldman gr...@unixhelp.org
To: Kris Kennaway kkenn...@physics.adelaide.edu.au
Cc: Peter Wemm pe...@netplex.com.au, Jean-Marc Zucconi j
On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
Hmm..I don't have a deflate on my system. This should be linked static as
well, otherwise you need the runtime linker + libraries, and that has a
69k
overhead (when stripped). Possibly
By the way, I'd recommend all -CURRENT users, after making world, make a
new copy of pidentd. The code to grovel through the kernel to find socket
info is MUCH less sickening now, so identd is less of a performance hit
and less likely to fail due to race conditions.
Brian Fundakowski Feldman
On Sat, 19 Jun 1999, Doug Rabson wrote:
On 19 Jun 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Ruslan Ermilov r...@ucb.crimea.ua writes:
* Clean the existing code (both userland and kernel) (10-20% done)
* Re-design the ipfw's API
* Port the existing functionality to the new API
* Proceed
On 19 Jun 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Brian F. Feldman gr...@unixhelp.org writes:
It might be worth (discussion of) making ipfilter the firewall of
choice for 4.0. There would of course be rule conversion
scripts/programs (ipfw-ipf(5)), and ipfilter would be converted to
a KLD
On Sat, 19 Jun 1999, Doug Rabson wrote:
On 19 Jun 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Brian F. Feldman gr...@unixhelp.org writes:
It might be worth (discussion of) making ipfilter the firewall of
choice for 4.0. There would of course be rule conversion
scripts/programs (ipfw-ipf(5
On 19 Jun 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Brian F. Feldman gr...@unixhelp.org writes:
On 19 Jun 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Rewriting ipfw rules to ipfilter rules on the fly should be trivial; a
simple Perl script should be sufficient.
Not quite as trivial as you think. ipfw
It has fwd stuff :)
Brian Fundakowski Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___ ___
gr...@freebsd.org _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve!_ __ | _ \._ \ |) |
http://www.FreeBSD.org/ _ |___/___/___/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
new firewall project
I wasn't planning on trying to rip something out from under anyone :)
On Sat, 19 Jun 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
On 19 Jun 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Brian F. Feldman gr...@unixhelp.org writes:
It might be worth (discussion of) making ipfilter
201 - 278 of 278 matches
Mail list logo
