Ingo Schwarze writes:
> Hi Stuart,
>
> Stuart Longland wrote on Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 09:07:38AM +1000:
>> Somebody wrote:
>
>>> - If we could clean-room implement a BSD-licensed
>>> EXT3/EXT4/BTRFS/XFS/JFS/whatever, following style(8), would there be
>>> interest in supporting that in OpenBSD?
>
Suggestion: to improve file system performance,
first document the bad behavior in detail.
Begin with examples of traces/logs of disk accesses associated
with file system operations.
Include scenarios (one hopes reproducible ones) to provoke
bad behavior.
Are reads worse than writes?
Hi Stuart,
Stuart Longland wrote on Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 09:07:38AM +1000:
> Somebody wrote:
>> - If we could clean-room implement a BSD-licensed
>> EXT3/EXT4/BTRFS/XFS/JFS/whatever, following style(8), would there be
>> interest in supporting that in OpenBSD?
> I'm hoping it will be more than
On 9/1/20 12:20 pm, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>> and the answer now becomes you are hardly qualified for such kind of
>> work.
> I suspect you are also unqualified.
>
You don't become qualified by writing words on a mailing list… and while
I acknowledge a lack of experience in the area, I do
Xiyue Deng wrote:
> It would be better to point out where to start, what
> hard problems to solve, what work has been done in this area that people
> can continue to work on.
Looking at that list, noone here owes you any of those.
Do your own homework.
Re-reading the thread is remarkable.
Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Even if you had, let's say, a whole year to spend full-time, you
> would not really be making any sense right now. So, could we drop
> this thread, please?
Ingo, you know that's impossible.
These are people on misc, their self-importance and optimism knows
no bounds.
Xiyue Deng wrote:
> Ingo Schwarze writes:
>
> > Hi Stuart,
> >
> > Stuart Longland wrote on Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 09:07:38AM +1000:
> >> Somebody wrote:
> >
> >>> - If we could clean-room implement a BSD-licensed
> >>> EXT3/EXT4/BTRFS/XFS/JFS/whatever, following style(8), would there be
> >>>
"Theo de Raadt" writes:
> Xiyue Deng wrote:
>
>> Ingo Schwarze writes:
>>
>> > Hi Stuart,
>> >
>> > Stuart Longland wrote on Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 09:07:38AM +1000:
>> >> Somebody wrote:
>> >
>> >>> - If we could clean-room implement a BSD-licensed
>> >>> EXT3/EXT4/BTRFS/XFS/JFS/whatever,
gwes writes:
> Suggestion: to improve file system performance,
> first document the bad behavior in detail.
>
> Begin with examples of traces/logs of disk accesses associated
> with file system operations.
>
> Include scenarios (one hopes reproducible ones) to provoke
> bad behavior.
>
> Are
On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 17:57:37 +0300
Hamd wrote:
> Under less than 24 hours, after my post, the misc has received 2 or 3
> brand new questions/posts regarding slow*. The problem is, well,
> obviously not me, personally.
> For the Dev Team (All of 'em. Volunteer, beer-teer, pay-teer ones): I
>
On Jan 08 08:31:26, n...@holland-consulting.net wrote:
> Another place where softdeps will sometimes bite you is when you
> unpack tar balls that overwrite existing files -- simple thought
> process says, "as long as you have enough space to cover the growth,
> fine". Softdeps might surprise you.
"4.) The code is right there, you are invited to improve the situation."
Simple answer: I'm not a developer, I'm a user. A regular one.
Under less than 24 hours, after my post, the misc has received 2 or 3 brand
new questions/posts regarding slow*. The problem is, well, obviously not
me,
On 2020-01-08, Nick Holland wrote:
> Weird stuff happens when Softdeps are working as designed.
To put it simply: Meta-data writes are delayed.
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
Thanks for the input on softdep. I read a lot on the pros and cons.
This certainly pushes me in the "con" direction.
I forgot to mention that I am using 6.6 stable, not current, so the
latest updates to softdep shouldn't be an issue.
Dave Raymond
On 1/8/20, Jan Stary wrote:
> On Jan 08
> - If we could clean-room implement a BSD-licensed
> EXT3/EXT4/BTRFS/XFS/JFS/whatever, following style(8), would there be
> interest in supporting that in OpenBSD?
And which "we" are you referring to here? Did you mean yourself,
or are you hoping that "somebody" will do it?
> There's merit in
Hello,
even the very first remote hole for OpenBSD, back in 2002 was about that the:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160915002152/http://www.iss.net/threats/advise123.html
https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2002-0639/
"ChallengeResponseAuthentication" was set to yes.. (it was more, but it would
On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 05:57:37PM +0300, Hamd wrote:
> Under less than 24 hours, after my post, the misc has received 2 or 3 brand
> new questions/posts regarding slow*.
Well, in the case of my issue, I am reasonably certain that this isn't
an issue with LibreSSL. I raised it as an issue of
Theo, please, give him the travel blessing, before departure.
Rod.
On Wed, 8 Jan 2020, cho...@jtan.com wrote:
> Some people have needs that OpenBSD doesn't meet. Of course the
> logical thing to do is to adapt it to meet them or to use something
> which does but to some -- in line with the
I've used Hurricane Electric's free DNS service for years now along with
their Tunnelbroker since my ISP still does not support IPv6 yet.
They also support dynamic updates which works with "ddclient" from the
OpenBSD package repo.
https://dns.he.net/
On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 8:25 AM Jay Hart
Some people have needs that OpenBSD doesn't meet. Of course the
logical thing to do is to adapt it to meet them or to use something
which does but to some -- in line with the general complexication
that's progressing nowadays -- this simple solution is not enough
and the need to announce one's
lu hu writes:
> So I think ChallengeResponseAuthentication should be set to NO, since
> it is not used by anything by default (you need manual steps as root
> to use ex.: skey).
If you want it set to NO, if you feel safer that way, set it to NO on
your systems.
IMHO
Allan
On 1/8/20 12:44 PM, Tom Smyth wrote:
As far as im aware there are 2 concerns about ZFS,
1) its license is not BSD /ISC you can use it and make money and not be sued,
but it is more restrictive than BSD / ISC
Yes, CDDL seems to be a no go based on past CDDL discussion which is
available
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2020 at 7:35 AM
From: "Hamd"
To: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: OpenBSD's extremely poor network/disk performance?
It's 2020 and it's -still- sad to see OpenBSD -still- has the
lowest/poorest (general/overall) performance ever:
Hi Karel,
Thanks, for the correction...
I thought zfs was bigger than that ;)
Thanks
On Wednesday, 8 January 2020, Karel Gardas wrote:
>
>
> On 1/8/20 12:44 PM, Tom Smyth wrote:
>
>> As far as im aware there are 2 concerns about ZFS,
>> 1) its license is not BSD /ISC you can use it and
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 3:54 AM Roderick wrote:
>
>
> Theo, please, give him the travel blessing, before departure.
>
> Rod.
>
>
> On Wed, 8 Jan 2020, cho...@jtan.com wrote:
>
> > Some people have needs that OpenBSD doesn't meet. Of course the
> > logical thing to do is to adapt it to meet them or
Hi,
I am using Iked to tunnel to my home router from an openbsd machine.
Everything works fine that far. Problems occur when my router reboots at
night and gets a new IP assigned. (DSL)
Afer receiving the new IP the tunnel is not rebuilt. Because the active
part doesn't recognize that the IP has
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 9:09 AM List wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I am using Iked to tunnel to my home router from an openbsd machine.
> Everything works fine that far. Problems occur when my router reboots at
> night and gets a new IP assigned. (DSL)
> Afer receiving the new IP the tunnel is not rebuilt.
On 9/1/20 12:56 am, Ian Darwin wrote:
>> - If we could clean-room implement a BSD-licensed
>> EXT3/EXT4/BTRFS/XFS/JFS/whatever, following style(8), would there be
>> interest in supporting that in OpenBSD?
>
> And which "we" are you referring to here? Did you mean yourself,
> or are you hoping
On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 10:19:36PM +, Pedro Caetano wrote:
> Hi misc@ happy new year!
>
> While running snapshot #584 on amd64 I noticed setting addresses using
> ifconfig is not consistent for ipv4 and ipv6.
>
> Is this expected behavior? I wasn't able to find anything in the FAQ.
>
It
This is 6.6-current on an ALIX (dmesg below), serving as my home server.
It's where I store the daily.local dumps, into /backup on a big USB disk.
The machine often crashes into a ddb when saving those dumps.
I only have lame screenshots now (will plug a cereal in):
On 8/1/20 1:25 am, Karel Gardas wrote:
> And yes, ffs performance sucks, but nor me nor you provide any diff to
> change that so we can just shut up and use what's available.
Okay, question is if not ffs, then what?
- Other BSDs have ZFS… is it viable to port that to OpenBSD? (Maybe
it's been
I'm trying to log into my OpenBSD server with an LDAP user and it's not working:
Jan 8 10:41:57 aagico-postgres-nextcloud sshd[15381]: Failed password
for dcorbe from 73.57.99.182 port 45222 ssh2
Although login.conf is configured properly:
# /usr/libexec/auth/login_-ldap -d -s login dcorbe
On 2020-01-08, "lu hu" wrote:
> are these real issues?
No.
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
Howdy Stuart,
On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 11:17, Stuart Longland wrote:
>
> On 8/1/20 1:25 am, Karel Gardas wrote:
> > And yes, ffs performance sucks, but nor me nor you provide any diff to
> > change that so we can just shut up and use what's available.
>
> Okay, question is if not ffs, then what?
>
On 2020-01-07 15:16, Nick Holland wrote:
hardware: DELL Latitude e5440
Pretty sure I've tested one of those, they work. As I recall, the
E5440 is a few years old, and if I recall properly, the battery
wasn't very long-lived in it. And the Dells of that vintage had a
really wacked default
Hello,
used https://www.sshaudit.com/ + ssh-audit package
###
by default OpenBSD 6.6 ssh client (SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_8.1) has issues:
Host Key Types: nistp should be removed
Key Exchange Algorithms: nistp should be removed, also
diffie-hellman-group14-sha1: SHA-1 has
On 2020-01-07 14:06, Karel Gardas wrote:
>
>
> On 1/7/20 7:38 PM, Jordan Geoghegan wrote:
>> > Using softdep on /tmp is a silly idea. >
> Why? To naive eyes it may look like a natural solution: e.g. before temp
> file is even created (on drive), it may be deleted which means there is
> no
37 matches
Mail list logo
