> We have received *no* non-public information. I've seen posts elsewhere by
> other *BSD people implying that they receive little or no prior warning, so
> I have no reason to believe this was specific to OpenBSD and/or our
> philosophy. Personally, I do find itamusing? that public announcem
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 08:17:42PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > We've been avoiding polluting services with absolutely every joke
> > of a service. If we added everything, it would be a disaster that
> > we have to manage and we don't want to.
> >
>
> Ok, no problem, yet asking again, now wi
So, yes, we the OpenBSD developers are not totally asleep and a handful of
us are working out how to deal with Intel's fuck-up aka the Meltdown
attack. While we have the advantage of less complexity in this area (e.g.,
no 32bit-on-64bit compat), there's still a pile of details to work through
abou
On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 08:17:42PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> We've been avoiding polluting services with absolutely every joke
> of a service. If we added everything, it would be a disaster that
> we have to manage and we don't want to.
>
Ok, no problem, yet asking again, now with some mainte
We've been avoiding polluting services with absolutely every joke
of a service. If we added everything, it would be a disaster that
we have to manage and we don't want to.
You've hit on one of the two services we've watched over the years
as markers between "registered" and "not registered".
Hav
Hi,
i don't know if anyone uses 6667 anymore, but adding it anyway
so the abbreviated one below w/" over SSL" does make more sense.
usually for me 6697 is the only port unrecognized by services(5)
in netstat output under Foreign Address, so this is for consistency,
and i believe these are official
On 23:36 Wed 13 Dec , Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 11:19:18PM +0300, Sergey Bronnikov wrote:
> > Patch below adds similar scripts for ed, perl, gdb, libkeynote, ctags,
> > m4 and sed. Patch looks huge but it is actually simple. Anyway if you
> > want splitted patch I will resend
On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 16:15:45 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> Cool, here's the diff. unifdef gives me the same result on jobs.c,
> except for the indentation change in two conditionals. ok?
OK millert@
- todd
On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 04:15:45PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 05 2018, "Theo de Raadt" wrote:
> >> On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:20:03 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> >>
> >> > I kinda take job control in my shell for granted. Todd, would it make
> >> > sense to just
On Fri, Jan 05 2018, "Theo de Raadt" wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:20:03 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
>>
>> > I kinda take job control in my shell for granted. Todd, would it make
>> > sense to just delete the #ifdefs? I doubt that we'll want to ship a ksh
>> > with no job control
> On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:20:03 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
>
> > I kinda take job control in my shell for granted. Todd, would it make
> > sense to just delete the #ifdefs? I doubt that we'll want to ship a ksh
> > with no job control in space-constrained installers.
>
> I don't see
On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:20:03 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> I kinda take job control in my shell for granted. Todd, would it make
> sense to just delete the #ifdefs? I doubt that we'll want to ship a ksh
> with no job control in space-constrained installers.
I don't see any reason to
fixed, thanks
diff --git a/bin/ksh/jobs.c b/bin/ksh/jobs.c
index 0623f4c6171..c368e4e5f71 100644
--- a/bin/ksh/jobs.c
+++ b/bin/ksh/jobs.c
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ struct proc {
#define JF_CHANGED 0x040 /* process has changed state */
#define JF_KNOWN 0x080 /* $! referenced */
#define JF_ZOMBIE 0x
Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03 2018, Carlos Cardenas wrote:
> > Howdy.
> >
> > Attached is a patch to address a TOCTOU issue with checking to
> > ensure disks are regular files, reported by jca@ .
> >
> > Comments? Ok?
>
> A bit late, but ok.
>
> While here, if the S_ISREG ch
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 05 2018 10:09:08 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> Does switching to the intel driver with xorg.conf or the below
> diff change anything?
Yes, with the intel driver the corruption is gone.
However, I updated my work Haswell laptop (x240; cpu0: Intel(R) Core(TM)
i7-4600U CPU @ 2.10GHz
On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 08:26:21AM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03 2018, Carlos Cardenas wrote:
> > Howdy.
> >
> > Attached is a patch to address a TOCTOU issue with checking to
> > ensure disks are regular files, reported by jca@ .
> >
> > Comments? Ok?
>
> A bit late, bu
17 matches
Mail list logo
