On Tuesday, 12th October 1999, Greg Lehey wrote:
On Monday, 11 October 1999 at 20:39:11 -0500, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Tue, Oct 12, 1999 at 11:04:50AM +0930, a little birdie told me
that Greg Lehey remarked
What mailer are you using? It didn't quote the "From " at the
beginning of the
"Matthew D. Fuller" wrote:
On Tue, Oct 12, 1999 at 11:04:50AM +0930, a little birdie told me
that Greg Lehey remarked
What mailer are you using? It didn't quote the "From " at the
beginning of the message, so David's message appeared as a separate
message. If you're looking for it,
"Brian F. Feldman" wrote:
I'd like everyone to note that for now, if you are providing user-access
to a 4.0 box (and you don't absolutely trust your users), you should be
using the RLIMIT_SBSIZE for limiting network memory usage just as
you use other RLIMITs for memory limiting, etc.
Ah,
On Tue, 12 Oct 1999, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
"Brian F. Feldman" wrote:
I'd like everyone to note that for now, if you are providing user-access
to a 4.0 box (and you don't absolutely trust your users), you should be
using the RLIMIT_SBSIZE for limiting network memory usage just as
I am working on a small threaded program
that uses aio_read(). In my first attempt
to run the program it killed my machine
instantly. The second time it only locked
it solid. I get no messages, warnings, or
errors.
I am certain that my program is not correct
(besides the obvious
I have submitted a PR. Upon closer inspection
I found that it is not (directly) the call
to aio_read() that kills the machine, but
instead a call to sched_yield() after a call
to pthread_cond_wait() with a NULL in the mutex
field. Even a print statement before the call
to sched_yield()
* Luoqi Chen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [991011 12:58]:
You need to go to -current for this.
Surely the relevant patches should be backported to -release, then?
Given the severity of the problem and the fact that this problem
purportedly hangs the entire system from an unprivileged context,
going to
On Mon, Oct 11, 1999, Chad David wrote:
Some replys indicated that I should use -current
for aio_*. Would this be true also for any
serious threading? Is -current ready for a
semi-production environment?
Not really. The fact is that a user program can crash
3.3-STABLE and that is
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 1999, Chad David wrote:
Some replys indicated that I should use -current
for aio_*. Would this be true also for any
serious threading? Is -current ready for a
semi-production environment?
Not really. The fact is that a
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Chris Costello wrote:
Not really. The fact is that a user program can crash
3.3-STABLE and that is unacceptable. No user program should be
able to bring down a system, _especially_ in -STABLE.
Running ``nmap -sP 172.22.0.0/16'' as a normal user will cause a panic
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
Running ``nmap -sP 172.22.0.0/16'' as a normal user will cause a panic on
a recent 3.3-STABLE system :(
Could you be any less specific about the panic? Any sort of detail is
just going to make us want to fix it.
Here most of the message I posted
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
Running ``nmap -sP 172.22.0.0/16'' as a normal user will cause a panic on
a recent 3.3-STABLE system :(
Could you be any less specific about the panic? Any sort of detail is
just going to make us want to fix it.
Here most of the
Running ``nmap -sP 172.22.0.0/16'' as a normal user will cause
a panic on a recent 3.3-STABLE system :(
Could you be any less specific about the panic? Any sort of detail
is just going to make us want to fix it.
Here most of the message I posted to -stable:
Oh, that
I'd like everyone to note that for now, if you are providing user-access
to a 4.0 box (and you don't absolutely trust your users), you should be
using the RLIMIT_SBSIZE for limiting network memory usage just as
you use other RLIMITs for memory limiting, etc.
--
Brian Fundakowski Feldman
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Steven Ames wrote:
Could someone define what NMBCLUSTERS is and what it is used for? I've
seen a lot of cases where increasing it (beyond the default 1024?) has
helped systems be more stable, but what is it?
Here is an informative email from David Greenman:
On Tuesday, 12 October 1999 at 8:09:40 +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Steven Ames wrote:
Could someone define what NMBCLUSTERS is and what it is used for? I've
seen a lot of cases where increasing it (beyond the default 1024?) has
helped systems be more stable, but what is
On Tue, Oct 12, 1999 at 11:04:50AM +0930, a little birdie told me
that Greg Lehey remarked
What mailer are you using? It didn't quote the "From " at the
beginning of the message, so David's message appeared as a separate
message. If you're looking for it, sort your messages in mailbox
On Monday, 11 October 1999 at 20:39:11 -0500, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Tue, Oct 12, 1999 at 11:04:50AM +0930, a little birdie told me
that Greg Lehey remarked
What mailer are you using? It didn't quote the "From " at the
beginning of the message, so David's message appeared as a separate
On Tue, Oct 12, 1999, Greg Lehey wrote:
It doesn't have anything to do with the MUA. The message arrived here
without a in front of the 'From ' at the beginning of the line,
which is an indication that it's a new message. But it's interesting
that it didn't happen to everybody.
Some
I am working on a small threaded program
that uses aio_read(). In my first attempt
to run the program it killed my machine
instantly. The second time it only locked
it solid. I get no messages, warnings, or
errors.
I am certain that my program is not correct
(besides the obvious consiquence
On Wed, Jan 01, 1997, Chad David wrote:
I am certain that my program is not correct
(besides the obvious consiquence of running
it :) ), but I would also like to determine
why it kills the machine. I was not root
either time I ran the code.
Then FreeBSD does have a problem. Please file
21 matches
Mail list logo
