Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2021/02/20 09:20, Remi Locherer wrote:
> > On February 19, 2021 8:56:31 PM UTC, Stuart Henderson
> > wrote:
> > >Canvassing opinions on having . and ! this way around. I'm using . for
> > >response, ! for no response, which makes more sense to me but it's been
> > >
On 2021/02/20 14:11, Andrew Hewus Fresh wrote:
> Unfortunately the patch doesn't actually apply due to non-ascii files in
> the diff, not quite sure the magic incantation to make that work,
I haven't tried with this, but usually it's "gpatch"
I've probably missed making it in for 6.9, but it is again time for
testing a perl update so it can become /usr/bin/perl
Several good changes this time:
https://metacpan.org/pod/distribution/perl/pod/perl5320delta.pod
https://metacpan.org/pod/release/SHAY/perl-5.32.1/pod/perldelta.pod
* A new "is
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 11:11:15PM +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 11:34:19AM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2021/02/18 22:24, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 12:01:28PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 21:18:51 +1100
> > > From: Jona
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 04:32:24PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> That's a good point about -f. I was thinking . is similar to how
> it looks in -f output, but really the "."s build up when there are no
> replies and it prints a backspace for a received response.
> I've had offlist replies in fav
> Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 18:31:55 +0100
> From: Otto Moerbeek
> Cc: tech@openbsd.org, piro...@openbsd.org
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 06:30:23PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>
> > > Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 18:23:26 +0100
>
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 06:30:23PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 18:23:26 +0100
> > From: Otto Moerbeek
> > Cc: tech@openbsd.org, piro...@openbsd.org
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> > Content-Disposition: inline
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 05:29:31PM
> Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 18:23:26 +0100
> From: Otto Moerbeek
> Cc: tech@openbsd.org, piro...@openbsd.org
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 05:29:31PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>
> > > Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 16:43:10 +0100
>
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 05:29:31PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 16:43:10 +0100
> > From: Otto Moerbeek
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 01:06:43PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 12:45:58PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Date:
On 2021/02/20 09:20, Remi Locherer wrote:
> On February 19, 2021 8:56:31 PM UTC, Stuart Henderson
> wrote:
> >Canvassing opinions on having . and ! this way around. I'm using . for
> >response, ! for no response, which makes more sense to me but it's been
> >pointed out that it's the opposite of
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 12:03:42PM +1000, Jonathan Matthew wrote:
> It's fairly easy to accidentally configure relayd to try to run check scripts
> faster than they finish, for example if you have a check interval of one
> second and the check script makes a tcp connection to a host that doesn't
>
On February 19, 2021 8:56:31 PM UTC, Stuart Henderson
wrote:
>Canvassing opinions on having . and ! this way around. I'm using . for
>response, ! for no response, which makes more sense to me but it's been
>pointed out that it's the opposite of what cisco does so it might
>confuse
>some people.
12 matches
Mail list logo
