Re: dev/videomode/vesagtf.c: -Werror,-Wunused-but-set-variable fix

Hi, > clang kernels are built with -Wno-unused-but-set-variable > try running 'make config' again oops, I forget 'make config'. Build process works good after that. Thank you! -- SASANO Takayoshi (JG1UAA)

Re: Fix ipsp_spd_lookup() for transport mode

On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 06:25:20PM +0900, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote: > Yes, if there is another better idea, it will be welcome. > For this moment, the diff is the best idea for me. Sorry, no better idea. I have no experiance with l2pt. Codewise the diff looks fine, but I don't understand the

Re: [PATCH] relayd client certificate validation again

Hi, we've got the patch ready for client certificate validation, cc'ing related people. The patch adds two features: 1. client certificate validation itself 2. passing on certificate and select fields in HTTP headers ## Brief description of client certificates (for whoever else is reading)

Re: sndiod: -F does not switch back to preferred device

On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 07:11:41PM +, Klemens Nanni wrote: > > So we've concluded that the hotplpugging framework needs work, fine. > > I'd still like to improve sndiod(8) regarding its own behaviour. > > How about the same diff modulo hotplug referencing/examples? > This helps me

syzkaller dt close

Hi, syzkaller has found a crash in dtclose(). panic: kernel diagnostic assertion "suser(curproc) == 0" failed: file "/syzkaller/managers/main/kernel/sys/dev/dt/dt_dev.c", line 431 https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=5d0d657ba9f3a16981aad2a6c50667918de4c955 Basically it does an open, setuid

Re: document patch(1) not supporting binary diffs

Ingo Schwarze wrote: > The patch(1) manual talks about "lines" throughout, > and for binary files, a concept of "lines" does not even exist. That is a bit strong. Some utilities designed for "text files" have no problem being both 8-bit clean and very-long-line capable. For example, you can

nsd 4.3.9

Trivial update to 4.3.9. The only change is to configparser.y, the rest is fluff. OK? diff --git configparser.y configparser.y index 6642a6f544c..70e54cf21f3 100644 --- configparser.y +++ configparser.y @@ -542,9 +542,9 @@ cpus: /* Users may specify "0 1", "0" "1", 0 1 or a combination

explain priority codepoints and their mapping in vlan.4

Hi, it might be helpful for others to understand the meaning of codepoints 0 and 1 of the vlan priority field. OK? Christopher Here is the formatted content: The 802.1Q and 802.1ad protocols include a 3-bit priority code point (PCP): PCP 1 is defined as the lowest priority

Re: document patch(1) not supporting binary diffs

On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 04:45:58PM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > Hi Christopher, > > Christopher Zimmermann wrote on Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 04:01:49PM +0100: > > > base patch cannot work with diffs of binary files. It might help to say > > so in the manpage since other implementations do support

document patch(1) not supporting binary diffs

Hi, base patch cannot work with diffs of binary files. It might help to say so in the manpage since other implementations do support this (ab)use of patch. OK? Christopher Index: patch.1 === RCS file:

Re: document patch(1) not supporting binary diffs

Hi Christopher, Christopher Zimmermann wrote on Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 04:01:49PM +0100: > base patch cannot work with diffs of binary files. It might help to say > so in the manpage since other implementations do support this (ab)use of > patch. OK? I agree you are pointing out a slight

Update www/surf to 2.1

Surf 2.1 was released seven months ago, but we still have 2.0 in ports. The attached files update us to 2.1. COMMENT = simple webbrowser based on webkit/gtk+ DISTNAME = surf-2.1 CATEGORIES =www HOMEPAGE = http://surf.suckless.org/ REVISION = 0 MAINTAINER= Joerg Jung

Bioctl -c at securelevel 2

When running with kern.securelevel=2, trying to add an existing softraid volume with bioctl -c fails with: softraid0: invalid metadata format This occurs as the call to VOP_OPEN in sr_meta_probe requests read/write access, which is obviously disallowed at securelevel 2. Considering that

Re: explain priority codepoints and their mapping in vlan.4

Christopher Zimmermann wrote: > We are not doing it different. But in my mind especially the mapping > of PCP / prio 0 / 1 is not intuitive and may be confusing (but is > correct!). That's why I think this should be documented in detail. Right. > >> The 802.1Q and 802.1ad protocols include a

Re: explain priority codepoints and their mapping in vlan.4

are you able to find a reference for this in any of the current specs? or in documentation from other vendors? i've faithfully maintained this behaviour, but the only place i've seen in with my own eyes is in our code. if we're doing it different to literally everyone else, then maybe we

Re: explain priority codepoints and their mapping in vlan.4

On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 07:12:31AM +1000, David Gwynne wrote: are you able to find a reference for this in any of the current specs? or in documentation from other vendors? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_P802.1p i've faithfully maintained this behaviour, but the only place i've seen in