On 2 Apr 2015, at 11:22, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
>
> Now one has to wonder how obnoxious one has to get so that people think
> "this can't be real".
>
> I tried really hard. :)
Not sure about your locale, but here (where the tradition originated) if you
fool someone in the morning then they are a
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 11:11:11AM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
>
> > On Apr 1, 2015, at 11:04 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
> >
> > On 1 Apr 2015, at 18:41, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> >>
> >> I guess you were right, this was bad.
> >>
> >> I moved the implementation to null.c, I hope this makes ever
On Apr 1, 2015, at 23:15, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 07:04:03PM +0100, David Chisnall wrote:
>> This almost certainly does not make people happy:
>>
>> - * Copyright (c) 2000 Mark R. V. Murray & Jeroen C. van Gelderen
>> - * Copyright (c) 2001-2004 Mark R. V. Murray
>> - *
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 07:04:03PM +0100, David Chisnall wrote:
> This almost certainly does not make people happy:
>
> - * Copyright (c) 2000 Mark R. V. Murray & Jeroen C. van Gelderen
> - * Copyright (c) 2001-2004 Mark R. V. Murray
> - * Copyright (c) 2014 Eitan Adler
> + * Copyright (c) 2015 Ma
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 01:52:04PM +0200 I heard the voice of
Mateusz Guzik, and lo! it spake thus:
>
> As a side note I'm surprised with the choice of 7.
>
> I would expect 3, no more, no less. 3 would be the number returned,
> and the number readers receive would be 3.
This is BSD: System V is
> On Apr 1, 2015, at 11:04 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
>
> On 1 Apr 2015, at 18:41, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
>>
>> I guess you were right, this was bad.
>>
>> I moved the implementation to null.c, I hope this makes everyone happy.
>>
>> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-all/2015-April/10
On 1 Apr 2015, at 18:41, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
>
> I guess you were right, this was bad.
>
> I moved the implementation to null.c, I hope this makes everyone happy.
>
> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-all/2015-April/101876.html
This almost certainly does not make people happy:
- *
>> On Apr 1, 2015, at 7:59 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 08:18:17AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 13:52 +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
>>> As a side note I'm surprised with the choice of 7.
>>>
>>> I would expect 3, no more, no less. 3 would be the
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 08:11:18AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 02:29:16PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> >
> > > Mateusz, if you keep the momentum, in the next years we will see lots
> > > of files with your copyright. :) There is no reason to create one
> > > just for this.
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 01:36:28PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> Author: mjg
> Date: Wed Apr 1 13:37:00 2015
> New Revision: 280955
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/280955
>
> Log:
> Add /dev/notrandom
>
> notrandom provides fast and reliable not random numbers.
>
> This w
On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 23:13 +0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 4/1/15 11:11 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > On 4/1/15 10:18 PM, Ian Lepore wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 13:52 +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> >>> As a side note I'm surprised with the choice of 7.
> >>>
> >>> I would expect 3, no mor
On 4/1/2015 6:36 AM, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> Author: mjg
> Date: Wed Apr 1 13:37:00 2015
> New Revision: 280955
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/280955
>
> Log:
> Add /dev/notrandom
>
> notrandom provides fast and reliable not random numbers.
>
This is a nice tradeoff. No lo
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 05:46:33PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 11:36:26AM -0400, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> > But surely to be non-random we need an equal number of 1 and 0 bits,
> > making 15 the clear choice.
>
> I don't know man.
I concur. Consider running FreeBSD to HP
> On 1 Apr 2015, at 16:46, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> We can add an ioctl to control this.
Thats a bad idea, because some fool may set up their local instance to return a
random number (like 4), and that will badly break the intent of this device.
And before somebody says “tools, not policy”, ther
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 11:36:26AM -0400, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Mark R V Murray wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Before someone makes a terrible mistake, I should point out that 4 is
> > confirmed random, as cited here: https://xkcd.com/221/
>
>
> But surely to be non-ran
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Mark R V Murray wrote:
>
>
> Before someone makes a terrible mistake, I should point out that 4 is
> confirmed random, as cited here: https://xkcd.com/221/
But surely to be non-random we need an equal number of 1 and 0 bits, making
15 the clear choice.
-Ben
___
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 02:29:16PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
>
> > Mateusz, if you keep the momentum, in the next years we will see lots
> > of files with your copyright. :) There is no reason to create one
> > just for this. Also, you can legitimately add your name into header of
> > null.c if
> On 1 Apr 2015, at 16:13, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> On 4/1/15 11:11 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
>> On 4/1/15 10:18 PM, Ian Lepore wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 13:52 +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
As a side note I'm surprised with the choice of 7.
I would expect 3, no more, no l
On 4/1/15 11:11 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 4/1/15 10:18 PM, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 13:52 +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
As a side note I'm surprised with the choice of 7.
I would expect 3, no more, no less. 3 would be the number returned,
and the number readers receive would b
On 4/1/15 10:18 PM, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 13:52 +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
As a side note I'm surprised with the choice of 7.
I would expect 3, no more, no less. 3 would be the number returned,
and the number readers receive would be 3.
5 would be right out.
there is prior
On 4/1/15 8:31 PM, Andrew Turner wrote:
On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 13:36:28 +0200
Mateusz Guzik wrote:
Author: mjg
Date: Wed Apr 1 13:37:00 2015
New Revision: 280955
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/280955
Log:
Add /dev/notrandom
notrandom provides fast and reliable not random n
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 08:18:17AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 13:52 +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> > As a side note I'm surprised with the choice of 7.
> >
> > I would expect 3, no more, no less. 3 would be the number returned,
> > and the number readers receive would be 3.
>
On Wed, 2015-04-01 at 13:52 +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> As a side note I'm surprised with the choice of 7.
>
> I would expect 3, no more, no less. 3 would be the number returned,
> and the number readers receive would be 3.
5 would be right out.
-- Ian
___
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 01:31:14PM +0100, Andrew Turner wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 13:36:28 +0200
> Mateusz Guzik wrote:
>
> > Author: mjg
> > Date: Wed Apr 1 13:37:00 2015
> > New Revision: 280955
> > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/280955
> >
> > Log:
> > Add /dev/notrandom
On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 13:36:28 +0200
Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> Author: mjg
> Date: Wed Apr 1 13:37:00 2015
> New Revision: 280955
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/280955
>
> Log:
> Add /dev/notrandom
>
> notrandom provides fast and reliable not random numbers.
>
> This was add
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 03:13:44PM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> Mateusz,
>
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 02:02:29PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> M> > You can add the seven_region variable to dev/null/null.c and implement
> M> > the new device here. Now notrandom.c shares > 50% of code with null.c.
Mateusz,
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 02:02:29PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
M> > You can add the seven_region variable to dev/null/null.c and implement
M> > the new device here. Now notrandom.c shares > 50% of code with null.c.
M>
M> Yeah I know, in fact I got most of the code from that driver.
M>
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 02:57:29PM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 01:52:04PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> M> /dev/zero returns 0s, while notrandom was implemented to return 7s.
> M>
> M> We could e.g. symlink /dev/notrandom to /dev/zero, but that would break
> M> compatibli
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 01:52:04PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
M> /dev/zero returns 0s, while notrandom was implemented to return 7s.
M>
M> We could e.g. symlink /dev/notrandom to /dev/zero, but that would break
M> compatiblity with Solaris apps depending on this functionality.
M>
M> It could als
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 02:43:13PM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 01:36:28PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> M> Author: mjg
> M> Date: Wed Apr 1 13:37:00 2015
> M> New Revision: 280955
> M> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/280955
> M>
> M> Log:
> M> Add /dev/n
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 01:36:28PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
M> Author: mjg
M> Date: Wed Apr 1 13:37:00 2015
M> New Revision: 280955
M> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/280955
M>
M> Log:
M> Add /dev/notrandom
M>
M> notrandom provides fast and reliable not random numbers.
M>
Author: mjg
Date: Wed Apr 1 13:37:00 2015
New Revision: 280955
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/280955
Log:
Add /dev/notrandom
notrandom provides fast and reliable not random numbers.
This was added in an effort to increase feature-compatiblity with
Solaris 10.
See http
32 matches
Mail list logo
