On 9/16/07, Aaron W. Hsu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What exactly are you trying to enable users to do? The fact that you need to
provide normal users with these kind of privileges indicates a possible flaw
in your overall scheme. You may find that, after careful reconsideration,
there are
On Sep 15, 2007, at 06:33:18, J.C. Roberts wrote:
Would Linus put up a fight if someone took his source tree and
relicensed the whole thing as GPLv3 without his permission? Yep,
you betcha he'd fight and he has already had to put up with a lot
of strong arm nonsense from the GPLv3/FSF
Chris wrote:
On 9/16/07, Aaron W. Hsu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What exactly are you trying to enable users to do? The fact that you need to
provide normal users with these kind of privileges indicates a possible flaw
in your overall scheme. You may find that, after careful reconsideration,
On Sunday 16 September 2007, Kyle Moffett wrote:
On Sep 15, 2007, at 06:33:18, J.C. Roberts wrote:
Would Linus put up a fight if someone took his source tree and
relicensed the whole thing as GPLv3 without his permission? Yep,
you betcha he'd fight and he has already had to put up with
Chris wrote:
...
user server = NOPASSWD: /sbin/mount, /usr/libexec/locate.updatedb
I might suggest using groups rather than individual users in sudoers.
On the small scale both are about the same, but using groups scales
better (both time and quantity).
So the above could be for the group
I do happen to agree with one of Jason Dixon's original arguments:
this and the related discussions on this list are an utter waste of
time and resources. (Of course, this means I'm going to contribute to
the waste a little more.)
Theo made his arguments. There have been some conversations
J.C. Roberts wrote:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-wirelessm=118857712529898w=2
Link with outdated info.
http://madwifi.org/browser/branches/ath5k
Link with outdated info.
I suggest actually taking the time to get the facts before making
completely baseless statements. When you make
On 9/16/07, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what's the ideal way to do things? Adding joeuser in the wheel
group and then add - joeuser ALL=(ALL) ALL in sudoers? And when the
joeuser account gets cracked, the cracker would be able to run
privileged commands? That defies the whole purpose.
There's no need to CC all those FSF people on this as I'm sure
they're plenty busy with other things, have lots of people to dispel
FUD for them, and certainly don't need the excess email in their
inboxes.
On Sep 16, 2007, at 03:52:43, J.C. Roberts wrote:
On Sunday 16 September 2007, Kyle
On 09/16/2007 10:12 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
So let's everybody calm down, ok?
Or rather, can everybody please just shitcan those perverted dipshits you
are replying to and get on with it? These people are here for one reason
only and that's to cause a stir -- however righteous they may feel
On Sunday 16 September 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
J.C. Roberts wrote:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-wirelessm=118857712529898w=2
Link with outdated info.
http://madwifi.org/browser/branches/ath5k
Link with outdated info.
I suggest actually taking the time to get the facts before making
Andris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Question: Is it true there was a developer's comment line in the Linux
kernel that said, Does this belong here?
Don't know that. But I do see this:
ftp -Vo -
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/~checkout~/src/sys/arch/mac68k/mac68k/m
achdep.c?rev=1.142
|
That's the wonderful thing about open development: our mistakes, and
the corrections made to fix mistakes, are out in the open for all to
see. And we wouldn't have it any other way.
Jeff
On Sunday 16 September 2007, Kyle Moffett wrote:
Secondly, what the HELL is with you guys and the personal
attacks?!?!? You said I am hopelessly misinformed, or a habitual
liar???
You are right and I apologize. I've received plenty of personal attacks
from your group, and failed to hold
On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 07:34:36PM -0400, William Boshuck wrote:
The evidence indicates that Rui is not, in fact, a human
being, but the latest (and possibly the most impressive
to date) application of the Dada Engine.
I can mail you some biological evidence, if you want ;)
*giggle*
Rui
--
On 9/16/07, Martin Reindl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Question: Is it true there was a developer's comment line in the Linux
kernel that said, Does this belong here?
Don't know that. But I do see this:
ftp -Vo -
On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 06:34:03PM -0700, J.C. Roberts wrote:
As ironic as it may seem, with today being the long anticipated release
of the very first working decompiler, the world of open source drivers
is going to get very interesting in the near future. In a few hours,
possibly days,
Le 16 sept. 07 ` 01:25, Sean Darby a icrit :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello fellows from the OpenBSD community,
I just wanted to stop and smell the roses. I occasionally play around
with other systems, of the Unix variety and, for the sake of seeing
things through the
On Sunday, 16 September 2007, J.C. Roberts wrote:
Let's say
someone took the linux kernel source from the official repository,
removed the GPL license and dedicated the work to public domain or put
it under any other license, and for kicks back-dated the files so they
are older than
Am 16.09.2007 um 12:05 schrieb J.C. Roberts:
Can I ask a question here? You're getting worked up over nothing.
Open Source doesn't
work without Open Hardware. The level of the software is approaching a
good level to
use for Open Hardware, IMO. While it's your time to relax the
hardware
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 09:17:41AM -0400, Eben Moglen wrote:
We will make no more public statements until the work is complete, and
we will be neither hurried nor intimidated by people who shout at us
instead of helping.
http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2007/jul/31/openhal/
As I said in a
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 05:14:30PM +1000, Chris wrote:
So what's the ideal way to do things?
Ok, here's the scoop... there is NO single best way. There are lots of
ways to solve these kinds of problems, and ideal changes with what the
problem is. This is why people keep asking you to explain the
Thanks for the detailed response. There have also been some very
articulate and fact-oriented responses here from the OpenBSD Misc list
as well.
I will repeat and elaborate on what I wrote in my first response which I
gave the subject Divide and conquer (was Re: Wasting our Freedom)
Although
On 16/09/2007, Marc Espie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 09:17:41AM -0400, Eben Moglen wrote:
We will make no more public statements until the work is complete, and
we will be neither hurried nor intimidated by people who shout at us
instead of helping.
On 9/16/07, PowerMan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2007/9/16, PowerMan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
dear sir or madam,
My first language is not English, please forgive me if I
made some bad words or sentences.
I am an embedded system engineer writing device drivers
for
On Sunday 16 September 2007 05:17:53 J.C. Roberts wrote:
On Sunday 16 September 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
J.C. Roberts wrote:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-wirelessm=118857712529898w=2
Link with outdated info.
http://madwifi.org/browser/branches/ath5k
Link with outdated info.
I
Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
Most noticeably, I fail to see any credits to Reyk Floeter in the
above press release.
Moreover, back when the release was first posted at the above address,
there was no credit even to the OpenBSD project, which I found simply
outrageous! Only after I (and
J.C. Roberts wrote:
You and the rest of the linux kernel devs need to realize there are a
lot of angry people who are tired of being ignored by the powers that
be in the GNU/FSF/GPL/SFLC. The claimed distinction between the linux
kernel, the linux operating system, the various linux distros,
Hello everyone,
I have a bunch of machines based on Intel motherboards, most of them are
D945GCNL,
but unfortunately I'm not able to use SMP because of ACPI problems.
Beside the kernel side problems, acpidump outputs a strange error: RSDT
is corrupted.
Can someone tell me if there is any
Chris,
Thanks for the message...
Chris So what's the ideal way to do things?
Of course, the ``ideal'' way to do anything really depends on what you want to
do. It would help if you could give us some more details about what you are
trying to do on the grand scheme of things, so that we could
On 9/16/07, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what's the ideal way to do things? Adding joeuser in the wheel
group and then add - joeuser ALL=(ALL) ALL in sudoers? And when the
joeuser account gets cracked, the cracker would be able to run
privileged commands?
cp /bin/sh /usr/local/bin/xsh
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-techm=118975639013313w=2
On 9/16/07, Micha3 Koc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everyone,
I have a bunch of machines based on Intel motherboards, most of them are
D945GCNL,
but unfortunately I'm not able to use SMP because of ACPI problems.
Beside the kernel side
Virtual Iron (VI) is a commercial virtualisation product based on Xen
3.1 dom0 which boots unmodified bsd.rd i386 and installs in a domU. As
you can see from the dmesg below, it occasionally complains about
timeouts on re0, and the virtual console gets cluttered in the later
stages of the install.
Hi,
yes, I've already googled for the issue and found this one, but it
does not help.
I think it is whole another problem.
regards
M.K.
Chris Kuethe pisze:
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-techm=118975639013313w=2
On 9/16/07, Micha3 Koc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everyone,
I have a
Hello,
I recently built a newer box that is running an Intel Xeon Quad Core X3210
processor. I cannot get the SMP kernels to work with this. I tried various
things with the 4.1 branch, including i386 and amd64. The i386 branches
hangs during boot, while the amd64 gets caught in an infinite
On Sunday 16 September 2007, Eben Moglen wrote:
Also, and again for the last time, let me state that SFLC's
instructions from its clients are to establish all the facts
concerning the development of the current relevant code (which means
the painstaking reconstruction of several independent
Hi,
If it's based on Xen, you probably can change the type of network card in
the configuration file to avoid the network problem.
I have try each of them (pcnet, rtl8139(by default) and ne2kpci) on Xen dom0
and launch a iperf to test performance :
vif = [ 'type=ioemu, bridge=xenbr1, model=pcnet'
On Sunday 16 September 2007 15:23:25 Daniel Hazelton wrote:
On Sunday 16 September 2007 05:17:53 J.C. Roberts wrote:
On Sunday 16 September 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
J.C. Roberts wrote:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-wirelessm=118857712529898w=2
Link with outdated info.
I don't thinl this helps openbsd or anyone else. As Theo is already
working with the individuals involved, and hasn't asked for help, I
think rather than saying I think you're going to suck, let's see
what happens. Going ovewrboard isn't going to help anyone.
On 9/16/07, J.C. Roberts [EMAIL
Can E. Acar wrote:
There have been complete silence from the leaders of their own
community (Linux Kernel developers, FSF, ...) all perhaps used your
Regarding Linux Kernel developers, false. _I_ have posted. ath5k,
wireless, and net driver maintainers have all sent emails. License and
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 11:48:47AM -0700, Can E. Acar wrote:
...
First, these developers got questionable advice from senior Linux kernel
developers, and SLFC (which is closely related to FSF) in the process.
The most questionable legal advice in this thread was by Theo de Raadt
who claimed
Hello,
I have an Asus P5WDG2 WS Professional (Intel 975X) motherboard, and I was not
able to load bsd.mp as it hangs at some point in the boot process.
I was able to work with the bsd.mp kernel with acpi enabled and by explicitly
disabling apm!
boot -c
enable acpi
disable apm
quit
Now
Daniel Hazelton wrote:
If the OpenBSD developers want to attack the Linux Kernel community over
patches that were *NEVER* *ACCEPTED* by said community, it should be just as
fair for the Linux Kernel community to complain about those (unspecified)
times where OpenBSD replaced the GPL on code
On Sunday 16 September 2007 14:48:47 Can E. Acar wrote:
On Sunday 16 September 2007 15:23:25 Daniel Hazelton wrote:
On Sunday 16 September 2007 05:17:53 J.C. Roberts wrote:
On Sunday 16 September 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
J.C. Roberts wrote:
Hello,
Well, actually I've already tried this without any luck. The problem
lies somewhere deeper,
I was trying to get at least acpidump working, and what I found is,
that RSD PTR looks fine,
but under address pointed by rs-addr all I can find are zeroes.
May be a problem with physical memory
Hi!
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 09:59:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 11:48:47AM -0700, Can E. Acar wrote:
...
First, these developers got questionable advice from senior Linux kernel
developers, and SLFC (which is closely related to FSF) in the process.
The most
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 14:14:29 +0200
Pierre Riteau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le 16 sept. 07 ` 01:25, Sean Darby a icrit :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello fellows from the OpenBSD community,
I just wanted to stop and smell the roses. I occasionally play
around
On Sunday 16 September 2007 16:39:26 Hannah Schroeter wrote:
Hi!
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 09:59:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 11:48:47AM -0700, Can E. Acar wrote:
...
First, these developers got questionable advice from senior Linux kernel
developers, and SLFC
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 08:10:35PM -0300, Alejandro Lozanoff wrote:
Thanks for your explanation and quick response, however with
-Uusemymalloc it segfaults almost when it starts. At least it showed
that the problem comes from that way, probably the mymalloc is worse
than the OpenBSD one. :P
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 10:39:26PM +0200, Hannah Schroeter wrote:
Hi!
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 09:59:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 11:48:47AM -0700, Can E. Acar wrote:
...
First, these developers got questionable advice from senior Linux kernel
developers, and
I did a fresh install of OpenBSD-CURRENT on my new laptop, an Acer
Aspire 5610 that comes with an Intel 3945 wireless adapter. But it
seems I can't use the adapter with OpenBSD.Following the wpi manpage,
I installed the wpi-firmware-2.14.1.5.tgz file with pkg_add, and it
seemed to install fine.
#
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 10:39:26PM +0200, Hannah Schroeter wrote:
The most questionable legal advice in this thread was by Theo de Raadt
who claimed choosing one licence for _dual-licenced_ code was illegal...
JFTR, I do *not* think that that assessment was questionable. Unless the
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 02:17:53AM -0700, J.C. Roberts wrote:
Look at what you are saying from a different perspective. Let's say
someone took the linux kernel source from the official repository,
removed the GPL license and dedicated the work to public domain or put
it under any other
I appologize for not including this, here is the dmesg of a successful
boot of the amd 4.2 DEFAULT kernel:
OpenBSD 4.2-current (GENERIC) #1191: Thu Sep 13 14:19:37 MDT 2007
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC
real mem = 2142949376 (2043MB)
avail mem = 2069811200
Paul Taulborg wrote:
I appologize for not including this, here is the dmesg of a successful
boot of the amd 4.2 DEFAULT kernel:
Paul,
Not sure all the tests you did, but first do not run AMD64 on Intel
processor. I would do this first thing if you haven't done already.
- Go into BIOS and
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Aaron Hsu wrote:
I am attempting to create an assembly program (for a class) on
OpenBSD. The teacher has no issue with me developing the code based
on the UNIX-based assembly (int 0x80 syscalls vs. int 0x21 Dos
Function), but he does not want me to use
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 05:12:08PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
reimplement them. Why don't you go and try asking NetApp for sources
to WAFL, and claim that they have moral duty to give the code back,
and see how quickly you get laughed out of the office?
which is _exactly_ what you guys are
Ted Unangst wrote:
cp /bin/sh /usr/local/bin/xsh
chmod u+s /usr/local/bin/xsh
then only tell the trusted users about xsh,
and you can avoid sudo altogether.
Ohhh... EEEVVVILLL... :)
--
[100~Plax]sb16i0A2172656B63616820636420726568746F6E61207473754A[dZ1!=b]salax
Hi Daniel,
Kind of bummer, as I will be losing 64 bit support by use i386. This is an
Intel Xeon, which should be compatible with the amd64 branch.
In any case; when attempting to run the i386 bsd.mp it hangs here:
mtrr: Pentium Pro MTRR support
It's a hard freeze-up, the keyboard will not
Update:
I ran boot -c with verbose on, and here are the last entries:
various probing failed messages (doesn't look like any problems), then:
ioapic0: conflicting map entries for pin 0
pctr: 686-class user-level performance counters enabled
mtrr: Pentium Pro MTRR Support
hard hang -- no further
Paul Taulborg wrote:
Kind of bummer, as I will be losing 64 bit support by use i386. This is
an Intel Xeon, which should be compatible with the amd64 branch.
I am not expert to say yes or no here. May be someone else will confirm
or deny. For now I would assume wrongly may be, but I wouldn't
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you claim that it's unethical for the linux community to use the code,
but brag about NetApp useing the code. what makes NetApp ok and Linux
evil? many people honestly don't understand the logic behind this.
please explain it.
There are two highly relevant angles to
Paul Taulborg wrote:
Update:
I ran boot -c with verbose on, and here are the last entries:
various probing failed messages (doesn't look like any problems), then:
ioapic0: conflicting map entries for pin 0
pctr: 686-class user-level performance counters enabled
mtrr: Pentium Pro MTRR Support
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Jacob Meuser wrote:
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 05:12:08PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
reimplement them. Why don't you go and try asking NetApp for sources
to WAFL, and claim that they have moral duty to give the code back,
and see how quickly you get laughed out of the
i386 GENERIC works, and boots up normally.
i386 SMP (bsd.mp) hangs at the line below (and additional lines in my
other message).
I have to hard power the machine down at this hang (i386 SMP kernel).
This same exact thing occurs with both 4.1 and current (just downloaded
the current today).
Paul Taulborg wrote:
Kind of bummer, as I will be losing 64 bit support by use i386. This is
an Intel Xeon, which should be compatible with the amd64 branch.
To answer your question, I guess it depend on the version of your processor.
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-miscm=117112049507303w=2
I
Paul,
If you want to try the AMD64 mp kernel with the patch I point out to you
on tech of a few days ago and see if that help you or not, I can make
the kernel I built that night for you to download and try if you trust
it. I would say to built your own, but if you want to do a quick test
I researched this time, and nothing.
Does anyone know of a port of the Nvidia driver so I can finally run my dual
screen setup I had with Slackware?
If no, anyway to run dual monitor? Im using a NVIDIA 6800 XT
Cyrus
Hello,
I'm transitioning my systems from Debian to OpenBSd.
For my older boxes, this is just fine as Xorg comes with great drivers
for the video on them.
However, my year-old amd64 will need some verifying before I wipe out
debian and put on OBSD.
Its an AMD Athlon64 3800+ with 1 GB ram,
On 9/16/07, Cyrus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I researched this time, and nothing.
Does anyone know of a port of the Nvidia driver so I can finally run my dual
screen setup I had with Slackware?
If no, anyway to run dual monitor? Im using a NVIDIA 6800 XT
Cyrus
Well if you are referring
On 9/16/07, Catalin Stoian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did a fresh install of OpenBSD-CURRENT on my new laptop, an Acer
Aspire 5610 that comes with an Intel 3945 wireless adapter. But it
seems I can't use the adapter with OpenBSD.Following the wpi manpage,
I installed the
Sean Darby wrote:
Question: Is it true there was a developer's comment line in the Linux
kernel that said, Does this belong here?
http://lxr.linux.no/source/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/common.c#L677
--
Lawrence Teo
Calyptix Security
http://www.calyptix.com/
Can E. Acar wrote:
Furthermore, since it is compatible with the binary HAL from
Atheros, the interface is fixed and the same both in Linux and
*BSD.
Hardly. It is software; the interface most definitely can and will change.
Jeff
Hi. I am running OBSD 4.0 with a memory filesystem. My fstab file
contains:
swap /var/mini/tmp mfs rw,nodev,noexec,nosuid,-s=75 0 0
and my mount command shows:
mfs:9659 on /var/mini/tmp type mfs (asynchronous, local, nodev, noexec,
nosuid, size=75 512-blocks)
I would like to regain
CRRC is pleased to announce for sale London Square at Southern Hills. London
Square at Southern Hills is a 182-unit apartment community located in Tulsa,
Oklahoma. To view the complete marketing package visit
www.crrc.us/londonsquare.htm
Aaron Hargrove
CRRC
1831 E. 71st
Tulsa, OK 74163
Paul Taulborg wrote:
I went through every option in the BIOS, and there is nothing at all
related to ACPI. :(
Your BIOS is version 35, and there is a very long list of BIOS upgrades
from Intel. The latest one for this board, if I am not mistaken is 44
and you have 35.
bios0: vendor Intel
On 9/16/07, Juan Miscaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi. I am running OBSD 4.0 with a memory filesystem. My fstab file
contains:
swap /var/mini/tmp mfs rw,nodev,noexec,nosuid,-s=75 0 0
...
I would like to regain some RAM by reducing the size (to 50).
I figure I will stop the single
On Sunday 16 September 2007 23:00:09 Can E. Acar wrote:
Daniel Hazelton wrote:
On Sunday 16 September 2007 14:48:47 Can E. Acar wrote:
[snip]
First, these developers got questionable advice from senior Linux kernel
developers, and SLFC (which is closely related to FSF) in the process.
78 matches
Mail list logo
