Hello,
following small patch fixes compilation failure when SR_DEBUG is defined in
softraidvar.h which results in definition of DPRINTF which results in error
about already defined macro in machdep.c
Index: arch/amd64/amd64/machdep.c
===
On 7/18/2018 2:54 AM, Florian Obser wrote:
> During g2k18 I commited rad(8).
>
> [snip]
I had a chance to do a couple simple tests with rad(8) in my test
environment.
# cat rad.conf
interface em0 {
prefix fdcf:b715:2f4d:100::/64
prefix 2001:DB8:2f4d:100::/64
dns {
This is the next small bit of rde rebuilding.
Move nexthop into struct filterstate (including nexthop flags) and use
them whereever possible. In some places (path_update, softreconfig_out
handler) the nexthop state are folded back into the rde_aspath.
This also fixes a possible crash when it comes
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 08:54:51AM +0200, Florian Obser wrote:
| During g2k18 I commited rad(8).
|
| The latest amd64 and i386 snapshots should contain it with enough
| features to replace rtadvd(8). If you are using rtadvd(8) I'd
| appreciate if you could switch to rad(8) and report back if any
|
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 19:07:21 +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> I think it's more elegant to just break; when getline() returns -1,
> you already have the free() at the end:
>
> if ((len = getline(&line, &linesize, F->fp)) == -1)
> break;
>
> But you get to choose the colour of the
Hi Todd,
Todd C. Miller wrote on Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 01:38:14PM -0600:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:21:31 -0600, "Todd C. Miller" wrote:
>> It probably makes more sense to do the newline check (and decrement
>> len if one is present) before newsize is computed. Then you would
>> need to unconditio
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 03:49:56PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
> The manual currently contains mentions of tls_peer_ocsp_result_msg(3),
> which doesn't exist.
>
> I renamed these to tls_peer_ocsp_result(3) and made a stab at
> documenting lines 89-96 of tls_ocsp.c, the only place which sets the
> s
Hi,
The unveil man page stands that unveil will return EPERM when locked:
EPERM An attempt to add permission to flags was made, or
path was not accessible, or unveil was called after it
was locked
The lock is sets when unveil(NULL
The manual currently contains mentions of tls_peer_ocsp_result_msg(3),
which doesn't exist.
I renamed these to tls_peer_ocsp_result(3) and made a stab at
documenting lines 89-96 of tls_ocsp.c, the only place which sets the
string `result_msg' that is later returned by tls_peer_ocsp_result(3).
I re
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 12:59:12PM +0100, Ricardo Mestre wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Are there any brave souls out there with unveil(2) enabled already?
>
> If yes please test this diff for spamlogd(8) which seems to only need rw
> access to the file PATH_SPAMD_DB and nothing else.
>
> Not asking for OKs y
Hi Robert,
Good catch! I just tested it and it still works, trying to open another file
after the pledge even with rpath/wpath promises the file won't be seen.
So in this case the unveil promise can be removed since it's no longer needed.
Thank you!
On 14:58 Wed 18 Jul , Robert Nagy wrote:
Hi All,
Rebooting after a dbb prompt, which I was unfortunately unable to capture, the
softraid configuration seemed to have been damaged.
root@j6:~ # dmesg | grep softraid
softraid0 at root
scsibus5 at softraid0: 256 targets
softraid0: trying to bring up sd8 degraded
softraid0: sd8 was not shut
Hi
I think you should call unveil before pledge, so that you don't
need to pledge unveil.
This will prevent futher calls to unveil.
On 18/07/18 12:59 +0100, Ricardo Mestre wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Are there any brave souls out there with unveil(2) enabled already?
>
> If yes please test this diff for s
Hi,
Are there any brave souls out there with unveil(2) enabled already?
If yes please test this diff for spamlogd(8) which seems to only need rw
access to the file PATH_SPAMD_DB and nothing else.
Not asking for OKs yet, but if the code pattern is correct can I start looking
at other programs?
S
Handle duplicate address detection failures.
We get notified when duplication is detected on the route socket. For
privacy addresses simply generate a new random address. If we have
soii enabled increase the dad counter on the prefix and generate a new
address. For eui64 addresses nothing can be
Hi,
Are there any brave souls out there with unveil(2) enabled already?
If yes please test this diff for spamlogd(8) which seems to only need rw
access to the file PATH_SPAMD_DB and nothing else.
Not asking for OKs yet, but if the code pattern is correct can I start looking
at other programs?
I
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:03:46AM +0200, Sebastien Marie wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 08:54:51AM +0200, Florian Obser wrote:
> > During g2k18 I commited rad(8).
> >
> > The latest amd64 and i386 snapshots should contain it with enough
> > features to replace rtadvd(8). If you are using rtadvd
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 08:54:51AM +0200, Florian Obser wrote:
> During g2k18 I commited rad(8).
>
> The latest amd64 and i386 snapshots should contain it with enough
> features to replace rtadvd(8). If you are using rtadvd(8) I'd
> appreciate if you could switch to rad(8) and report back if any
>
18 matches
Mail list logo
