Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 12:23:35, tlambert2 (Terry Lambert) wrote about Re: Two Junior
Kernel Hacker tasks..:
make buildkernel is rather easy way to work it around: in
any case object tree is machine-dependent, and one yet
another directory does not destroy anything. ;|
The make
Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 19:01:42, LConrad (Len Conrad) wrote about resolv.conf
options:
RTFS ;))
s man resolv.conf talks about options, but not timeout or retry
S means source.
For FreeBSD standard resolver, source of /etc/resolv.conf reading
is in src/lib/libc/net/res_init.c.
But you are
On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 10:50:00AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
Why can't we do it like NetBSD and have
sys/${MACHINE_ARCH}/compile?
It makes it harder to make src/sys/compile a single simple symlink to
writable storage.
Our /sys layout is suffiently different from NetBSD, I don't think
On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 01:51:54PM -0500, Will Andrews wrote:
On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 11:43:58AM -0700, Matthew Jacob ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Yes, and you're right. But we'll probably never do this (tm).
Never say never. I for one am in favor of that system. =)
Yuck! Puke! I for one
On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 12:42:36PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
Please use ${MACHINE}, not ${MACHINE_ARCH}. That way I can build
GENERIC for both i386 and pc98 at the same time without resorting to
the GENERIC98 hack I use now.
...
I'd be up for doing this, so long as I got to choose where to
On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 12:11:36PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote:
On 22-Jun-01 Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Baldwin writes:
: 2) Build kernels in sys/compile/${MACHINE_ARCH}/FOO rather than
: sys/compile/FOO.
Please use ${MACHINE}, not ${MACHINE_ARCH}. That way I
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 10:44:51PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote:
On 23-Jun-01 Peter Pentchev wrote:
On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 12:23:35PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
make buildkernel is rather easy way to work it around: in
any case object tree is machine-dependent, and one yet
another
Wes Peters said on Jun 23, 2001 at 23:28:42:
Plenty of GNU stuff there, though it doesn't say so explicitly.
Of course, they say it's all meant only for legacy Unix stuff.
Can you substantiate your claim there is plenty of GNU stuff in
Interix, or are you just talking out your ass as
Soren Kristensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As I now has prototypes avaliable of low cost PCI and MiniPCI boards,
moving to production in a couple of weeks, I would like to check up on
the work, as I would really like to see FreeBSD support. The boards are
now supported in OpenBSD 2.9.
OK, so
Dag-Erling Smorgrav([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.06.24 17:48:47 +:
Soren Kristensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As I now has prototypes avaliable of low cost PCI and MiniPCI boards,
moving to production in a couple of weeks, I would like to check up on
the work, as I would really like to see
Karsten W. Rohrbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
i think ipsec crypto abstraction into hardware is one side of the medal,
but the other side -- to be polished first -- ist getting openssl onto
the iron.
What you're basically trying to say is that you want a userland
interface to the crypto
sys/${MACHINE_ARCH}/compile?
It makes it harder to make src/sys/compile a single simple symlink to
writable storage.
There is no need to make symlink in src tree.
-- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Are you David O'Brien or freebsd-hackers list itself?
/netch
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 12:51:13 -0700
Brooks Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
brooks Ok, after a week and a half of doing other things, I've got a patch
brooks together which adds interface cloning based on NetBSD's code. The
brooks difference is that you may pass an interface of the from gif# if
Dag-Erling Smorgrav([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.06.24 18:20:53 +:
Karsten W. Rohrbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
i think ipsec crypto abstraction into hardware is one side of the medal,
but the other side -- to be polished first -- ist getting openssl onto
the iron.
What you're basically
Karsten W. Rohrbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
yup, exactly. to me it seems to be a major problem to get some unified
api out of openssl adressing fucnctions on the hardware -- i simply do
not know how other crypto chipsets do it, i just investigated the
rainbow board. they got a patch against
On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Rahul Siddharthan wrote:
Wes Peters said on Jun 23, 2001 at 23:28:42:
Plenty of GNU stuff there, though it doesn't say so explicitly.
Of course, they say it's all meant only for legacy Unix stuff.
Can you substantiate your claim there is plenty of GNU stuff in
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
sure. my impression with the rainbow guys was, that they are very open
to the opensource community. they supplied a board, (user) docs and the
unreleased driver/openssl code to us and i was very impressed about
their attitude
In a message dated 6/24/01 12:33:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A 3.x driver *could* be ported forward to 4.x and 5.x, but the
required changes are not trivial (newbus, SMPng...) and you'd still
need sample boards for testing and debugging, and docs for reference
Dag-Erling Smorgrav([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.06.24 18:38:31 +:
Karsten W. Rohrbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
yup, exactly. to me it seems to be a major problem to get some unified
api out of openssl adressing fucnctions on the hardware -- i simply do
not know how other crypto chipsets
Hi,
Thanks for the responses so far. First, let me say that I'm a hardware
guy, and don't know all the details of FreeBSD's network stack.
There is two common kind of hardware encryption acceleration, and I
think they're being mixed a little here.
SSL is for secure web access, and the main
Bsdguru == Bsdguru [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bsdguru I'd suggest doing a study on the benefits as well. With 1+Ghz
Bsdguru processors, the advantages of doing this in hardware become
Bsdguru less than in the old days.
Think about the embedded market, where 486 class processors are still
Çäðàâñòâóéòå!!
Âàñ ïðèâåòñòâóåò e-Marketing Center.
Ïðåäëàãàåì Âàì ðåàëüíûå ñïîñîáû çàðîáîòêà.
Êîíòåíò íàøåãî ïðåäëîæåíèÿ:
-Multi-Level-Marketing-ïðîãðàììà ìãíîâåííîãî çàðîáîòêà
-Âîçìîæíîñòü ïîëó÷åíèÿ áåñïëàòíûõ êàðò Visa, American Express, Master Card
-Áåñïëàòíûå e-Marketing Books-òåõíîëîãèÿ
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 06:38:31PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Karsten W. Rohrbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
yup, exactly. to me it seems to be a major problem to get some unified
api out of openssl adressing fucnctions on the hardware -- i simply do
not know how other crypto
I have compiled options BRIDGE into my kernel. (also options IPFIREWALL,
and IPSTEALTH, but probably not important).
So I booted up with ep0 and wi0 in their slots, everything is great. I set
up bridging with:
sysctl -w net.link.ether.bridge=1
then made sure everything was wide open:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 12:42:36PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
: Please use ${MACHINE}, not ${MACHINE_ARCH}. That way I can build
: GENERIC for both i386 and pc98 at the same time without resorting to
: the GENERIC98 hack I use now.
: ...
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Sure, sounds good. Actually, with mjacob's suggestion, I would go with
: sys/${MACHINE}/compile/FOO
:
: pc98 and powerpc variations will make this ugly.
No they won't. pc98 is the reason that this *MAKES* sense.
Warner
To
Is there a way to undef an option?
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 10:50:00AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
: Why can't we do it like NetBSD and have
:
: sys/${MACHINE_ARCH}/compile?
:
: It makes it harder to make src/sys/compile a single simple symlink to
: writable storage.
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Which is another good reason for sys/compile/${MACHINE}/FOO
: Otherwise where DOES the pc98 kernel builds happen? Under the
: non-existant sys/pc98/ ?
David, a simple ls to sys/pc98 shows that it is populated with lots of
files.
% ls
Warner Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is there a way to undef an option?
I thought about this, too. Right now there isn't a way to do that,
and neither OpenBSD nor NetBSD have one AFAIK. That said, I think it
would be trivial to implement. The list of options and devices is a
simple linked
I poked though the archives, but didn't see anything that pointed
to this: is there proscribed method for auto-detecting the
insertion/ejection of an audio CD?
I'm hoping for some daemon that provides notification events, rather
than me having to write my on C code. :/
I'm looking for
Has anyone looked at DVD ioctls on IDE? It took me some time to
realize (even after reading the source a couple of times) that the
current DVD ioctls only apply to SCSI.
Dave.
--
|David Gilbert, Velocet
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 05:52:54PM -0400, David Gilbert wrote:
Has anyone looked at DVD ioctls on IDE? It took me some time to
realize (even after reading the source a couple of times) that the
current DVD ioctls only apply to SCSI.
'Looked at'? What do you mean? People have been making
Dima Dorfman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Warner Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is there a way to undef an option?
I thought about this, too. Right now there isn't a way to do that,
and neither OpenBSD nor NetBSD have one AFAIK. That said, I think it
would be trivial to implement. The
Hi,
I've sent this to freebsd-questions but no luck yet.
I am using freebsd 4.0. and failed to mount a Linux partition on
the second hard disk. Could you please shed some light?
Thanks very much
Weiguang
==
bash-2.04# fdisk
Brian == Brian Reichert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 05:52:54PM -0400, David Gilbert wrote:
Has anyone looked at DVD ioctls on IDE? It took me some time to
realize (even after reading the source a couple of times) that the
current DVD ioctls only apply to SCSI.
On Sunday 24 June 2001 20:12, David Gilbert wrote:
... One issue is that dvdio.h seems to be missing structure items that
are required by dvd software. I have attempted to compile livid (oms)
and videolan ... both which at least talk about working on BSD. Livid
refuses to compile because
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
Hi,
Thanks for the responses so far. First, let me say that I'm a hardware
guy, and don't know all the details of FreeBSD's network stack.
There is two common kind of hardware encryption acceleration, and I
think they're being
ok, thank you! This explains my inability to perform bridging like I
expected to
I've been told the wi driver can't do bridging. The Cisco/Aironet
an driver can. Patches were submitted so you can do this. They are
in the tree.
If I want to turn a PC into a full-blown access point,
Quick question. Anyone know how gracefully the kernel handles a
socket connection that is killed by the client between a select and
accept call? I don't expect any problems, but I know there was a race
condition in Linux that caused all kinds of nasty bugs and problems.
Granted
list tracker wrote:
ok, thank you! This explains my inability to perform bridging like I
expected to
I've been told the "wi" driver can't do bridging. The Cisco/Aironet
"an" driver can. Patches were submitted so you can do this. They are
in the tree.
If I want to turn a PC
Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 00:05:36, clefevre-lists (Cyrille Lefevre) wrote about Re:
include directive in config(8) (was: Two Junior Kernel Hacker tasks..):
how about undef options XXX and undef device XXX, etc. ?
s/undef/no/
I like Cisco style ;)))
/netch
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
Soren Kristensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SSL is for secure web access, and the main need is for Public Key
generating. This don't really have anything to do with the IP stack.
Afaik, OpenSSL is more like a extension to the web server software.
Try 'man openssl', or just 'openssl -help'.
Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 10:55:10, louisphilippe (Louis-Philippe Gagnon) wrote about
pthread/longjmp/signal problem:
I've been trying to implement a IsBadReadPtr-style function in FreeBSD by
using signal handlers and longjmp/setjmp. It seemed to work as expected,
until I started using the
Sean Chittenden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Quick question. Anyone know how gracefully the kernel handles a
socket connection that is killed by the client between a select and
accept call? I don't expect any problems, but I know there was a race
condition in Linux that caused all kinds
There was one in FreeBSD too. It's been fixed; accept(2) will return
-1 and set errno to ECONNABORTED, which you'd know if you'd RTFM.
Already RTFM'd. The following was a tad vague and it led me to
be a skeptic.
It is possible to select(2) a socket for the purposes of doing an
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 08:12:28PM -0400, David Gilbert wrote:
Brian == Brian Reichert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 05:52:54PM -0400, David Gilbert wrote:
Has anyone looked at DVD ioctls on IDE? It took me some time to
realize (even after reading the source a
47 matches
Mail list logo
