Fred Snurd fredsn...@yahoo.com writes:
Git fans like to know what branch is current, and bash's implementation
of PS1 allows for update each time it is displayed. All of my attempts
of adding a call to a ksh function into PS1 appear to be evaluated at
the time that PS1 is set, but not upon
On Oct 27 12:14:08, st...@williamsitconsulting.com wrote:
I have an older system on physical hardware that needs upgrading. I've been
procrastinating because it's the type of thing that needs to be done from
start to finish, and it's rather out of date (OpenBSD 5.2-current) so I know
there
On 10/27/14 20:19, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Major differences.
The snapshot code is -current. That includes commits from only a few
hours earlier. From time to time, it also contains changes which are
not yet commited.
If I got you correctly the current install56.iso from the
snapshots
On 10/28/14 20:52, Harald Dunkel wrote:
I would suggest to increase the version information in the
snapshot file names as soon as the release tag is attached and
the -stable branch is created. This could help to avoid a lot
of confusion.
You get your asbestos pants on, and I'll get myself
Hi David,
On 10/27/14 20:20, David Vasek wrote:
This quite recent thread comes to mind:
http://marc.info/?t=13988430601r=1w=2
Are your symptoms similar? AMI BIOS versions dated close to each other, maybe.
That looks *very* close to the problem I have with the
Axiomtek NA570. I will
On 10/28/14 09:02, Richard Toohey wrote:
You get your asbestos pants on, and I'll get myself some popcorn.
I didn't mean any offense.
Thanx for the heads-up
Harri
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 08:52:24AM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
On 10/27/14 20:19, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Major differences.
The snapshot code is -current. That includes commits from only a few
hours earlier. From time to time, it also contains changes which are
not yet commited.
On 10/27/14 20:19, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Major differences.
The snapshot code is -current. That includes commits from only a few
hours earlier. From time to time, it also contains changes which are
not yet commited.
If I got you correctly the current install56.iso from the
snapshots
I have a Logitech G11 USB keyboard that I occassionally attach to my
OpenBSD 5.6 laptop.
Not sure if this is hardware problem with the laptop, or a USB stack
issue with OpenBSD.
Anyway, on to the issue:
A few weeks ago, I restarted the laptop with the keyboard plugged in,
and later unplugged
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 06:28:39PM -0400, Josh Grosse wrote:
I am testing an extremely simple lab environment with iked(8) and
failing to establish flows and SAs on one of two platforms.
I'm sure its somthing extremely simple, but I'm at a loss to
figure it out on my own. A cluestick would
Theo de Raadt said:
Oh, you want us to call the snapshots 57, instead?
How will that enligthen people?
FWIW naming snapshots after release they lead to is more helpful then
naming them after previous release that does not include some of their
code.
--
Dmitrij D. Czarkoff
As a release engineer, the numbering convention of the snapshots does seem
confusing to me at first. But if it works for the project, that's what's
important.
And as Theo brought up, numbering them 57 snapshots doesn't fix anything.
It just changes the confusion. Instead of you asking if the 56
Hi,
I recently changed my laptop at work for a Lenovo T440. Pretty good machine
except the crappy touchpad. Lenovo has managed to totally fuck the
trackpoint while making the touchpad a nightmare.
I tried to tweak the X configuration to make it somewhat usable. My
configuration follows.
Is
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 08:13:51PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
On 10/27/14 19:44, Theo de Raadt wrote:
How is the current install56.iso in pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/amd64/ on
the mirrors related to the shipped 5.6 CDs?
From the ftp site:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 58741116 Oct 27
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 09:12:14PM -0400, Predrag Punosevac wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Mayuresh Kathe mayur...@devio.us wrote:
64-bit supposedly supports upto 16 exabytes of memory ('ram').
would such large capacities actually be possible to ue with
openbsd for amd64
trondd said:
And as Theo brought up, numbering them 57 snapshots doesn't fix anything.
It just changes the confusion. Instead of you asking if the 56 snapshot
was close to the 56 release version, we'd have someone asking if the 57
snapshot they see is close to the 57 release that won't be cut
On 2014-10-28 13:27, Артур Истомин wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 09:12:14PM -0400, Predrag Punosevac wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Mayuresh Kathe mayur...@devio.us
wrote:
64-bit supposedly supports upto 16 exabytes of memory ('ram').
would such large capacities actually be
Hi all,
I needed to enable the DHCP server on the machine that's going to
become my OpenBSD/pf firewall/router/NAT, and the directions said to
put this:
# echo 'dhcpd_flags=' /etc/rc.conf.local
On my machine there was no rc.conf.local, just an rc.local, so I put it
there, and no joy, dhcpd
On 2014-10-28 08:09, Vincent Gross wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 06:28:39PM -0400, Josh Grosse wrote:
I am testing an extremely simple lab environment with iked(8) and
failing to establish flows and SAs on one of two platforms.
I'm sure its somthing extremely simple, but I'm at a loss to
On 2014-10-28 09:46, Steve Litt wrote:
Is /etc/rc.local just some artifact I should ignore, or does it
actually have a purpose?
It has a purpose. Some local startup activities may require
scripting. The rc.conf.* files are parsed for variables, they
are not scripts.
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Patrik Lundin wrote:
Thank you Stefan for taking a look, see comments inline:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 12:32:30PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 09:19:25PM +0100, Patrik Lundin wrote:
# disklabel -E wd0
Create the following partitions (in this
On 14-10-28 08:46 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
Is /etc/rc.local just some artifact I should ignore, or does it
actually have a purpose?
Both.
RTFM: rc(8), rc.conf(8), rcctl(8)
While that manpage uses language like It is **advisable** to leave
rc.conf untouched, the actual situation is much stricter
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:09:33 -0400
Josh Grosse j...@jggimi.homeip.net wrote:
On 2014-10-28 09:46, Steve Litt wrote:
Is /etc/rc.local just some artifact I should ignore, or does it
actually have a purpose?
It has a purpose. Some local startup activities may require
scripting. The
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014, Joel Sing wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Patrik Lundin wrote:
[snip]
Since I am not able to boot on the device i have to run installboot as
the last step in the installer. For this i need to add -r /mnt (of
course the following is also copied by hand):
===
#
Hello @misc, yesterday at work i've found an RS/6000 Model 140
http://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/cgi-bin/ssialias?infotype=ddsubtype=smhtmlfid=897/ENUS7043-140
so,
i was wondering how about installing release 5.5 macppc on it.
Just want to know if somebody try it and if you have some clue on
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Leonardo Santagostini
lsantagost...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello @misc, yesterday at work i've found an RS/6000 Model 140
http://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/cgi-bin/ssialias?infotype=ddsubtype=smhtmlfid=897/ENUS7043-140
so,
i was wondering how about installing release
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:11:51 -0500
Adam Thompson athom...@athompso.net wrote:
The question you actually asked was about /etc/rc.local, which serves
a completely different function. That file remains a shell script
wherein you can put whatever custom craziness you like, that gets
executed
On 14-10-28 10:34 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
I think I understand. If I wanted to run daemontools at boot, I would
put the svscanboot command in /etc/rc.local, right?
Assuming there was no pre-built package, or port available, yes.
For example, I have installed smokeping from source instead of
On 2014-10-28 11:45, Adam Thompson wrote:
On 14-10-28 10:34 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
I think I understand. If I wanted to run daemontools at boot, I would
put the svscanboot command in /etc/rc.local, right?
Assuming there was no pre-built package, or port available, yes.
There are other valid
On October 28, 2014 5:05:47 PM CET, Josh Grosse j...@jggimi.homeip.net wrote:
On 2014-10-28 11:45, Adam Thompson wrote:
On 14-10-28 10:34 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
I think I understand. If I wanted to run daemontools at boot, I
would
put the svscanboot command in /etc/rc.local, right?
Assuming
On 27 Oct 2014 21:29:07 +0100
pe...@bsdly.net (Peter N. M. Hansteen) wrote:
Julian Smith ju...@op59.net writes:
pass in on $int_if proto tcp from $int_net to $ext_if port 80 rdr-to
$server
pass out on $int_if proto tcp to $server port 80 received-on $int_if
nat-to $int_if
Are you telnetting to the external IP of the server from the internal
client?
Have you enabled logging in pf? Are the packets blocked or are they passed
by a different rule that doesn't give the expected results?
Tim.
On 2014-10-28 13:22, Alexander Hall wrote:
On October 28, 2014 5:05:47 PM CET, Josh Grosse
j...@jggimi.homeip.net wrote:
These days I'm using mount_tmpfs(8), which inherits attributes from
the
mount point.
FWIW, so did mount_mfs...
Well, yeah. But not until 2004! :)
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014 14:20:25 +0200
Someone wrote:
Nick Holland wrote:
encrypted vnd is going away for 5.7. Suggeted by lists at srdn dot
de, thanks!
I haven't been able to find this suggestion. Has a maintenance
burdon arisen? Otherwise I would argue that it is more secure
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:40:52 -0400
trondd tro...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you telnetting to the external IP of the server from the internal
client?
Yes. Actually i've tried using the external IP and the internal IP.
Both have the same result - telnet says 'telnet: Unable to connect to
remote host:
Nick Holland wrote:
encrypted vnd is going away for 5.7. Suggeted by lists at srdn dot
de, thanks!
I haven't been able to find this suggestion. Has a maintenance
burdon arisen? Otherwise I would argue that it is more secure
than softraid for small files. I am fairly sure
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 01:24:30AM +1100, Joel Sing wrote:
You could try this (only compile tested) diff:
I tried this diff on 5.5-stable and it appeared to solve my problem! The
system now boots from sr0a without asking for a passphrase. Overwriting
the keydisk partition makes the
Thank yo very much for your feedback.
=)
Kind regards
Saludos.-
Leonardo Santagostini
http://ar.linkedin.com/in/santagostini
2014-10-28 17:16 GMT-03:00 Peter Kay syllops...@syllopsium.co.uk:
If I remember correctly that's a PReP model, the PowerPC Reference
Platform. You might be able
Hello,
in OpenBSD 5.5 make did try makefiles in order BSDmakefile - makefile -
Makefile.
In Current BSDmakefile is not tried anymore, at least not with highest
priority. Is this intended?
Carsten
yep, it's intended: see:
https://www.mail-archive.com/source-changes@openbsd.org/msg54858.html
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Carsten Kunze carsten.ku...@arcor.de wrote:
Hello,
in OpenBSD 5.5 make did try makefiles in order BSDmakefile - makefile -
Makefile.
In Current BSDmakefile is not
Hi Andy,
sorry for the delay, but a lot of more important work were between your
mail and this answer ;).
You can set a simple prio on a rule like;
pass proto tcp from $left to $right set prio (1,4)
With PRIQ I mean the scheduler priq instead of cbq.
Relevant lines of my current pf.conf
If I remember correctly that's a PReP model, the PowerPC Reference Platform.
You might be able to get NetBSD running on it, Windows NT and if you're a
masochist, possibly OS/2 PPC... (Plus AIX, of course)
On 28 October 2014 14:40:09 GMT+00:00, David Coppa dco...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct
That is, indeed, a PReP machine and not a CHRP machine.
Cheers,
-Kit
On Oct 28, 2014, at 3:16 PM, Peter Kay syllops...@syllopsium.co.uk wrote:
If I remember correctly that's a PReP model, the PowerPC Reference Platform.
You might be able to get NetBSD running on it, Windows NT and if you're a
Any one had ever install openbsd on cubieboard?
I tried in this way.
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.arm/915
and it gives me the same panic!
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.arm/916
Anyone know it?
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 09:49:58AM -0400, I wrote:
On 2014-10-28 08:09, Vincent Gross wrote:
[snip]
I had the very same issue on my own setup. I did not investigate the
source, but I think there is a bug in the code that handles PSK authn,
because it worked perfectly fine when I switched to
45 matches
Mail list logo
