Thank you for your answer. That clarifies things for me.
w.r.t a couple of points:
I did make an inference. Alexander stated several points, and
I used deduction to summarize his statements.
1. (Increased CPU)(Increased Memory)-(Increased Overhead).
2. (I will grant that here I restated what
On 01/19/15 22:25, worik wrote:
Summary:
The files under /var/www/htdocs are by default it seems all owned by
root:wheel. What are the issues with changing that to be a normal user?
The long version
My work flow involves building a directory structure on another machine
and using 'rsync'
On 2015-01-17, Daniel Dickman didick...@gmail.com wrote:
1) Can patches be applied selectively and out of order?
Don't do that.
Actually, yes they can. If you can identify that a particular patch
doesn't apply to your use of the system there's no particular need to
apply it. I can't think of
On 2015-01-17, Daniel Dickman didick...@gmail.com wrote:
1) Can patches be applied selectively and out of order?
Don't do that.
Actually, yes they can. If you can identify that a particular patch
doesn't apply to your use of the system there's no particular need to
apply it. I can't
On 2015-01-17, Daniel Ouellet dan...@presscom.net wrote:
Just go to 5.6 or even better to current that is almost 5.7 now and use
ikev2 instead.
This might add confusion though, ikev2 (iked) isn't compatible with v1,
and I'm imagining that somebody with a specific set of parameters to use will
On 2015-01-15, Steve Shockley steve.shock...@shockley.net wrote:
On 1/14/2015 9:47 AM, Predrag Punosevac wrote:
and I ran
the chroot enable script from rrdtool.
As documented in the rrdtool pkg-readme, you must do:
/usr/local/share/examples/rrdtool/rrdtool-chroot enable
You should look
Summary:
The files under /var/www/htdocs are by default it seems all owned by
root:wheel. What are the issues with changing that to be a normal user?
The long version
My work flow involves building a directory structure on another machine
and using 'rsync' when I am ready to transfer it to
Hi misc@
If anyone is in Glasgow on Thursday evening - I'm giving a talk at the
Scottish Linux User Group (http://scotlug.github.io/) on Building
redundant and transparent firewalls with OpenBSD.
See you there!
Cheers
Fred
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015, at 11:41 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 10:59:19PM +0100, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
http://www.spiegel.de/media/media-35663.pdf
PANT SPARTY is a backdoor in the SSH daemon for *NIX, based on
OpenSSH portable
They are not talking about the
Hi,
As we all know DigitalOcean now supports FreeBSD. Despite over half of the
upvotes at the main BSD thread
(https://digitalocean.uservoice.com/forums/136585-digitalocean/suggestions/3232571-support-bsd-os)
being for OpenBSD, OpenBSD users have been forced to open up their own
separate
On 2015-01-19, Remco re...@d-compu.dyndns.org wrote:
OpenBSD
# shutdown -ph 1501161730
other BSDs
# shutdown -p 1501161730
It makes sense to me to imply -h when specifying -p.
I'd love it, but for all I know somebody may have a strong opinion
against it.
On the one hand, shutdown -hp is
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 03:59:34AM +, currellbe...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
The FAQ[1] states that soft updates result in a large performance increase
in disk writing performance, and links to a resource[2] which claims that
soft updates, in addition to being a performance enhancement,
f5b wrote:
Want
Power off host at the specified time using shutdown
OpenBSD
# shutdown -ph 1501161730
other BSDs
# shutdown -p 1501161730
Why? Will we sync?
man shutdown 8 in OpenBSD
-h The system is halted at the specified time when shutdown
On 1/19/15 3:19 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2015-01-17, Daniel Ouellet dan...@presscom.net wrote:
Just go to 5.6 or even better to current that is almost 5.7 now and use
ikev2 instead.
This might add confusion though, ikev2 (iked) isn't compatible with v1,
and I'm imagining that somebody
A performance increase in performance?
Jan
--- faq14.html.orig Mon Jan 19 11:53:40 2015
+++ faq14.html Mon Jan 19 11:53:53 2015
@@ -898,7 +898,7 @@ and Yale Patt/a and developed for FreeBSD by
SoftUpdates imposes a partial ordering on the buffer cache
operations which permits the
OpenBSD
# shutdown -ph 1501161730
other BSDs
# shutdown -p 1501161730
It makes sense to me to imply -h when specifying -p.
I'd love it, but for all I know somebody may have a strong opinion
against it.
I don't have anything against it. -p was added a very very long time
ago.
Today is Martin Luther King Jr. Day in the United States,
a federal holiday in all 52 states.
The /usr/bin/calendar program shows incorrectly that yesterday, Jan 18,
was Martin Luther King day in New York.
And it does not show that today, Jan 19 the third Monday in January, is
the correct US
On January 19, 2015 5:43:58 PM CET, Richard rich...@aaazen.com wrote:
Today is Martin Luther King Jr. Day in the United States,
a federal holiday in all 52 states.
Darn, man. That subject and initial sentence was pretty darn close to hit the
spam training bucket. :-)
/Alexander
The
Hi,
I need help for this problem:
(router1 and router2 are openbsd router, pc1 can be anything)
pc1 ---
|
router1 (b1) - (b2) router2 (a2) - internet
(a1)
|
--- internet
I want
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 08:11, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2015-01-17, Daniel Dickman didick...@gmail.com wrote:
1) Can patches be applied selectively and out of order?
Don't do that.
Actually, yes they can. If you can identify that a particular patch
doesn't apply to your use of the system
Hi!
Anybody know why I'm getting this Ruby 2.2.0 build error?
% uname -a
OpenBSD dev.my.domain 5.5 GENERIC#276 i386
% ruby-install ruby 2.2.0
...
linking shared-object digest/sha2.so
installing default sha2 libraries
generating constant definitions
compiling etc.c
linking shared-object etc.so
Hi!
OpenBSD 5.7 (19 Jan 2015)
Strange math. for me.
Capacity is 465.8G
Sum of labels is
1.0G+1.2G+4.0G+6.0G+2.0G+1.0G+10.0G+2.0G+2.0G+300.0G = 329.2G
Where is 136.6G ?
# disklabel -h sd0
# /dev/rsd0c:
type: SCSI
disk: SCSI disk
label: Hitachi HTS72755
duid: 1881213cdc5807e9
flags:
On Jan 20 00:20:55, dmitry.sen...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
OpenBSD 5.7 (19 Jan 2015)
Strange math. for me.
Capacity is 465.8G
Sum of labels is
1.0G+1.2G+4.0G+6.0G+2.0G+1.0G+10.0G+2.0G+2.0G+300.0G = 329.2G
Where is 136.6G ?
Unallocated after sd0k?
Or did your last partition just
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Dmitry Orlov dmitry.sen...@gmail.com wrote:
Capacity is 465.8G
Sum of labels is
1.0G+1.2G+4.0G+6.0G+2.0G+1.0G+10.0G+2.0G+2.0G+300.0G = 329.2G
Where is 136.6G ?
# disklabel -h sd0
# /dev/rsd0c:
...
16 partitions:
#size offset
From disklabel(8):
Space left after all partitions have reached their maximum size is
left unallocated.
On 1/19/15, Dmitry Orlov dmitry.sen...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
OpenBSD 5.7 (19 Jan 2015)
Strange math. for me.
Capacity is 465.8G
Sum of labels is
As result of default installation process.
Whole Disk + Automatic disklabel
On 20.01.2015 00:27, Jan Stary wrote:
On Jan 20 00:20:55, dmitry.sen...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
OpenBSD 5.7 (19 Jan 2015)
Strange math. for me.
Capacity is 465.8G
Sum of labels is
What place in disklabel output point me unallocated space?
And how i can allocate unallocated ? :)
Below output without -h
# disklabel sd0
# /dev/rsd0c:
type: SCSI
disk: SCSI disk
label: Hitachi HTS72755
duid: 1881213cdc5807e9
flags:
bytes/sector: 512
sectors/track: 36
tracks/cylinder: 158
I infer from your response that soft updates possess:
1. increased overhead over default FFS settings.
2. increased implementation complexity over default FFS settings.
Also, I infer that journaling and soft updates provide equivalent data
safety
guarantees in theory. Do they provide
On Mon, 19 Jan 2015, Alexander Hall wrote:
On January 19, 2015 5:43:58 PM CET, Richard rich...@aaazen.com wrote:
Today is Martin Luther King Jr. Day in the United States,
a federal holiday in all 52 states.
Darn, man. That subject and initial sentence was pretty darn close to hit the
spam
Sorry.
I thought that all the remaining space is distributed to /home.
On 20.01.2015 00:34, Philip Guenther wrote:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Dmitry Orlov dmitry.sen...@gmail.com
wrote:
Capacity is 465.8G
Sum of labels is
1.0G+1.2G+4.0G+6.0G+2.0G+1.0G+10.0G+2.0G+2.0G+300.0G =
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 9:19 AM, openda...@hushmail.com wrote:
Hi!
Anybody know why I'm getting this Ruby 2.2.0 build error?
% uname -a
OpenBSD dev.my.domain 5.5 GENERIC#276 i386
% ruby-install ruby 2.2.0
...
linking shared-object digest/sha2.so
installing default sha2 libraries
Dmitry,
your free space is after the k partition.
286442096 512 byte blocks = 136.5862350464 G
The allocated space is consistent, i.e. without holes ...
# sizeoffset END
a: 2097152 64 2097216
b: 2569344 2097216 4666560
c:
On 01/19/15 14:10, Currell Berry wrote:
I infer from your response that soft updates possess:
1. increased overhead over default FFS settings.
2. increased implementation complexity over default FFS settings.
for a he stated definition of you infer, sure.
Also, I infer that journaling and
33 matches
Mail list logo
