On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 02:07:32PM -0400, Winfred Harrelson wrote:
> I know others are using the new aggr(4) interface but I am having a
> problem with trying to use it on some new servers I have recently
> gotten. Hoping I could get some help from someone here since my
> searches have not been
o...@mailo.com wrote:
$ sysctl hw.sensors | grep temp
hw.sensors.cpu0.temp0=95.00 degC
hw.sensors.acpitz0.temp0=79.00 degC (zone temperature)
I have an old (of course) IBM/Lenovo X60 with a similar issue. Once it
gets to 80 or 90C, the CPU goes into thermal runaway, emits a "exceeded
128C"
I know others are using the new aggr(4) interface but I am having a
problem with trying to use it on some new servers I have recently
gotten. Hoping I could get some help from someone here since my
searches have not been very fruitful.
First off this is on a Supermicro X11DPi-N(T) and it is
Just a general question as I got to really love syspatch and sysupgrade
to the point that oppose to before, now my platforms are pretty much
always up to date and patch in just a few days after patches are release
or even in some cases the same day.
To add more platform, I guess that mean man
This is a regression report for 019_libssl.patch
predrag@oko$ uname -a
OpenBSD oko.int.bagdala2.net 6.7 GENERIC.MP#5 amd64
predrag@oko$ syspatch -l
001_wscons
002_rpki
003_ssh
004_libssl
005_unbound
006_smtpd_sockaddr
007_perl
008_hid
009_asr
010_x509
011_shmget
012_tty
013_tty
014_iked
015_rpki
No, it is a question of which additional platform, you avoided that
didn't you
if you name one that less than 100 people use, then well come on
Daniel Ouellet wrote:
> Just a general question as I got to really love syspatch and sysupgrade
> to the point that oppose to before, now my
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 6:22 PM Matt Dunwoodie wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 17:46:05 -0500
> Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda wrote:
>
> > Hi to all,
> >
> > (unsure if this if for tech@ or misc@)
>
> Probably better suited for misc, moved there.
>
> > I'm using wireguard interfaces but I see that
Jordan Geoghegan wrote:
> On 2020-08-11 15:50, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Predrag Punosevac wrote:
> >
> >> Theo de Raadt wrote:
> >>
> >>> No, it is a question of which additional platform, you avoided that
> >>> didn't you
> >>>
> >> octeon is the only one I can think of.
> > read below:
> >
>
On 2020-08-11 15:50, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Predrag Punosevac wrote:
Theo de Raadt wrote:
No, it is a question of which additional platform, you avoided that
didn't you
octeon is the only one I can think of.
read below:
if you name one that less than 100 people use, then well come on
Theo de Raadt wrote:
>
> No, it is a question of which additional platform, you avoided that
> didn't you
>
octeon is the only one I can think of. arm64 binary patches are
available for few releases already. The binary patches might be the
least of the troubles on that platform.
On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 17:46:05 -0500
Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda wrote:
> Hi to all,
>
> (unsure if this if for tech@ or misc@)
Probably better suited for misc, moved there.
> I'm using wireguard interfaces but I see that no matter what
> domain I put the interface:
>
> # ifconfig wg0 rdomain
On 2020-08-11 20:35, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Jordan Geoghegan wrote:
On 2020-08-11 15:50, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Predrag Punosevac wrote:
Theo de Raadt wrote:
No, it is a question of which additional platform, you avoided that
didn't you
octeon is the only one I can think of.
read
I just upgraded from 6.6 to snapshot via sysupgrade -s
After reboot I get the various emails the upgrade goes fine, no errors,
the firmware is upgraded.
About 30 seconds after I get the login prompt the laptop powers off.
I turned in on and at the boot prompt typed boot -c and disable amdgpu
Predrag Punosevac wrote:
> Theo de Raadt wrote:
>
> >
> > No, it is a question of which additional platform, you avoided that
> > didn't you
> >
>
> octeon is the only one I can think of.
read below:
> > if you name one that less than 100 people use, then well come on
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 08:17:01PM -0400, Jon Fineman wrote:
> I just upgraded from 6.6 to snapshot via sysupgrade -s
>
> After reboot I get the various emails the upgrade goes fine, no errors,
> the firmware is upgraded.
>
> About 30 seconds after I get the login prompt the laptop powers off.
>
Oh, I'm "glad" someone else is having the same problem. (Sorry)
I had gotten to the point of assuming a hardware problem.
Being able to rule that out is nice.
At least there is hope in getting a fix.
I'm really not in a position to buy another one. $$ missing.
If any developer could get me a
Am 11.08.20 um 02:52 schrieb Theo de Raadt:
>
> But no, WG14 are the lords and masters in the high castle, and now 6
> years after the ship sailed something Must Be Done, it must look like
> They Solved The Problem, and so they'll create an incompatible API.
>
> Will they be heroes? No, not
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 08:13:24AM +0200, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
> Am 11.08.20 um 02:52 schrieb Theo de Raadt:
> >
> > But no, WG14 are the lords and masters in the high castle, and now 6
> > years after the ship sailed something Must Be Done, it must look like
> > They Solved The Problem,
>>
>> WG14 has reserved some identifiers for future extensions of the
>> standard. E.g. those starting with mem_. Naturally, others then choose
>> identifiers that do not conflict with this, such as explicit_bzero. But
>> if that name is then used in the standard unchanged, it would mean that
>>
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 08:20:32AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 08:13:24AM +0200, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
>
> > Am 11.08.20 um 02:52 schrieb Theo de Raadt:
> > >
> > > But no, WG14 are the lords and masters in the high castle, and now 6
> > > years after the ship
Hi Demi,
have done:
ndp -s fe80::1%vio0 00:00:5e:00:02:02
which results in a nearly permanent setup:
Neighbor Linklayer Address Netif ExpireS Flags
2a03:4000:24:82f:: d6:16:7b:a0:ce:63vio0 permanent R l
2a03:4000:24:82f::1
Fresh install of OpenBSD/6.7/amd64/install67.fs
on Lenovo 3000 G530 laptop, 2008 manufacture year.
Straight from the start, just after log in:
CPU: 100% idle
load averages: 0.04, 0.06, 0.04
$ sysctl hw.sensors | grep temp
hw.sensors.cpu0.temp0=95.00 degC
hw.sensors.acpitz0.temp0=79.00 degC (zone
Theo de Raadt wrote in
<61139.1597087...@cvs.openbsd.org>:
|Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
|> Am 10.08.20 um 17:00 schrieb Theo de Raadt:
|>> Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
|>>
|>>> OpenBSD has the explicit_bzero function to reliably (i.e. even if not
|>>> observable in the C abstract machine)
o...@mailo.com wrote:
> CPU: 100% idle
> load averages: 0.04, 0.06, 0.04
100% idle means "100% doing nothing". This is normal for a CPU that
does nothing.
> $ sysctl hw.sensors | grep temp
> hw.sensors.cpu0.temp0=95.00 degC
> hw.sensors.acpitz0.temp0=79.00 degC (zone temperature)
This seems hot
Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
> In the end, I wouldn't be surprised, if WG14 just goes with one of the
> existing names, not caring about reserved identifiers.
There is only one existing name in common use.
Even glibc chose to go with the name explicit_bzero.
I notice you keep using the other
Thus said Jonathan Gray on Mon, 10 Aug 2020 23:54:54 +1000:
> For now we could just skip reading a disabled bios on RV610.
Thanks, that tweak seems to have gotten past the problem and now X will
start:
initializing kernel modesetting (RV610 0x1002:0x94C1 0x1028:0x0D02 0x00).
radeondrm0:
ile, and not dropping
screenshot:
https://i.postimg.cc/rpVF1QSx/IMG-20200811-163108.jpg
>> Also, it takes several seconds for xterm to redraw itself
>> from top to bottom on my 1280x800 display.
>> Is it because of NVIDIA graphics?
> Stay away from Nvidia if possible (disable
27 matches
Mail list logo