Useful and clean. Just like they are at the moment.
Personally, I would rather it be complete with pitfalls that may be
encountered during an upgrade, that need manual resolution.
As far as I am aware, deleting some files that require manual execution
in the first place isn't much of a
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 23:44, Nick Holland wrote:
own. You will have a lot of testing to do. You will note that while
deleting rwhod was undoubtedly exciting for developers, actually putting
it on current.html -- so I could put it on upgrade56.html -- was not
nearly as much fun and never
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 23:44, Nick Holland wrote:
own. You will have a lot of testing to do. You will note that while
deleting rwhod was undoubtedly exciting for developers, actually putting
it on current.html -- so I could put it on upgrade56.html -- was not
nearly as much fun and never
Hi all,
I just updated to OpenBSD 5.6 and I was happy to see that rcp, rsh,
rshd, rwho, rwhod, etc have been removed (at least according to the
Changelog). However, the upgrade instructions fail to mention that files
like /etc/rc.d/rwhod or /usr/bin/rwho should be removed.
Sören.
I just updated to OpenBSD 5.6 and I was happy to see that rcp, rsh,
rshd, rwho, rwhod, etc have been removed (at least according to the
Changelog). However, the upgrade instructions fail to mention that files
like /etc/rc.d/rwhod or /usr/bin/rwho should be removed.
How much of a catastrophy is
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 01:36:59PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I just updated to OpenBSD 5.6 and I was happy to see that rcp, rsh,
rshd, rwho, rwhod, etc have been removed (at least according to the
Changelog). However, the upgrade instructions fail to mention that files
like /etc/rc.d/rwhod
Le Dimanche 9 Novembre 2014 21:36 CET, Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org
a écrit:
I just updated to OpenBSD 5.6 and I was happy to see that rcp, rsh,
rshd, rwho, rwhod, etc have been removed (at least according to the
Changelog). However, the upgrade instructions fail to mention that
On 2014/11/09 22:08, Job Snijders wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 01:36:59PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I just updated to OpenBSD 5.6 and I was happy to see that rcp, rsh,
rshd, rwho, rwhod, etc have been removed (at least according to the
Changelog). However, the upgrade instructions fail
Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org wrote:
On 2014/11/09 22:08, Job Snijders wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 01:36:59PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I just updated to OpenBSD 5.6 and I was happy to see that rcp, rsh,
rshd, rwho, rwhod, etc have been removed (at least according to the
On 2014/11/09 21:41, Martin Brandenburg wrote:
Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org wrote:
On 2014/11/09 22:08, Job Snijders wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 01:36:59PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I just updated to OpenBSD 5.6 and I was happy to see that rcp, rsh,
rshd, rwho, rwhod,
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 10:02:32PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
I was answering the specific point about the _exact_ same state as a
clean 5.6 installation there.
There are some specific cases where it makes a lot of sense to tell
people to rm things (e.g. base program moved to ports). And
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 10:02:32PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
I was answering the specific point about the _exact_ same state as a
clean 5.6 installation there.
There are some specific cases where it makes a lot of sense to tell
people to rm things (e.g. base program moved to ports). And
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 01:36:59PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I just updated to OpenBSD 5.6 and I was happy to see that rcp, rsh,
rshd, rwho, rwhod, etc have been removed (at least according to the
Changelog). However, the upgrade instructions fail to mention that files
like /etc/rc.d/rwhod
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 7:36 AM, Theo de Raadt dera...@cvs.openbsd.org wrote:
Question for the community: Do you want the upgrade instructions to
be 100% useful, or 100% complete?
Neither; 100% is unrealistic. Getting '90%' on either measure exceeds
my expectations.
The only expectation
Neither; 100% is unrealistic. Getting '90%' on either measure exceeds
my expectations.
The same percentage of flights would be acceptable?
I think that problem has been highlighted and we now belongs to all users to
check and submit oversights.
My 2 cents,
Regards,
--
Eric JACQUOT
Agreed that 100% is the goal - and I'm prepared to try and help
achieve this. I already think what is done is pretty damn
good - it far exceeds *my* expectations.
You've obviously never flown in Australia. 100% of flights *do
not* leave on time. There are errors and glitches - but fortunately
On 11/09/14 16:07, Job Snijders wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 01:36:59PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I just updated to OpenBSD 5.6 and I was happy to see that rcp, rsh,
rshd, rwho, rwhod, etc have been removed (at least according to the
Changelog). However, the upgrade instructions fail to
Getting back to topic, is having an
old binary (rwhod) not deleted during an upgrade catastrophic?
I don't think so.
You would be mistaken. Wars have been fought over less -- by
the absolutists.
18 matches
Mail list logo
