On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Alexander Hall ha...@openbsd.org wrote:
$ which true false
/usr/bin/true
/usr/bin/false
while those should be available to /etc/rc, I'd prefer not using them.
-5 points for using which. :)
$ whence -v true
true is a shell builtin
I happen to think that
On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 11:39:59AM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Alexander Hall ha...@openbsd.org wrote:
$ which true false
/usr/bin/true
/usr/bin/false
while those should be available to /etc/rc, I'd prefer not using them.
-5 points for using which. :)
On 09/08/10 17:39, Ted Unangst wrote:
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Alexander Hall ha...@openbsd.org wrote:
$ which true false
/usr/bin/true
/usr/bin/false
while those should be available to /etc/rc, I'd prefer not using them.
-5 points for using which. :)
Ah fuck. Yes. Darn. :-d
$
Theo has suggested that it would be nicer if the generating new
host key output was all on one line.
Basically we want ssh-keygen: generating new host key: to start
the line, followed by the algorith name as each key is generated.
In the unlikely event that an error happens, ssh-keygen
Todd T. Fries t...@fries.net writes:
Penned by Christian Weisgerber on 20100907 16:55.45, we have:
|
| ssh_keys=0
| if [ ! -f /etc/ssh/ssh_host_dsa_key ]; then
| if [ $((ssh_keys++)) -eq 0 ]; then
| echo -n ssh-keygen: generating new host key:
| fi
| echo -n DSA
${_keyfile} ]; then
if [ ${ssh_keys} -eq 0 ]; then
echo -n 'ssh-keygen: generating new host key:'
ssh_keys=1
fi
echo -n ${_name}...
if ! ssh-keygen -q -t ${_type} -f ${_keyfile} -N
On 09/08/10 00:47, Alexander Hall wrote:
I also want to kill the IMO useless ssh-keygen: part of the output,
if noone opposes.
I oppose. Disregard that.
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Alexander Hall ha...@openbsd.org wrote:
This isn't C. :)
first=1
first=true
first=
first=false
[ $first ] || echo
$first || echo
On Tue, 7 Sep 2010, Todd T. Fries wrote:
I am not sure of a better way than what you've proposed, but the logic
does make perfect sense to me.
As a shortened version of what you proposed:
[snip]
my, that is complicated. Is there anything we could do in ssh-keygen to
make this simpler?
I am not sure of a better way than what you've proposed, but the logic
does make perfect sense to me.
As a shortened version of what you proposed:
[snip]
my, that is complicated. Is there anything we could do in ssh-keygen to
make this simpler?
I thought I asked you that before.
10 matches
Mail list logo
