> Indeed, you are correct. Is vpnd broken then, for assuming > that it can gather the required randomness in one read? Yep. It assumes that if the required randommness numbers aren't met a read to /dev/random will block. And it's not the only program that assumes this : I also did. /dev/random is called a blocking random device, which more or less implies that it will totally block. I suggest we put this somewhere in the kernel docs, since lots of people out there assume that it totally blocks. Means I've got to updates some sources of mine :) > Matthew. Igmar - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- /dev/random probs in 2.4test(12-pre3) Matthew Kirkwood
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2.4test(12-pre3) H. Peter Anvin
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2.4test(12-pre3) Matthew Kirkwood
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2.4test(12-pre3) folkert
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2.4test(12-pre3) Matthew Kirkwood
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2.4test(12-pre3) Igmar Palsenberg
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2.4test(12-pre... Jeff Garzik
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2.4test(1... Igmar Palsenberg
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2.4te... David Ford
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2... Albert D. Cahalan
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2... Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2... Alexander Viro
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2... Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2... Andrew Morton
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2... Igmar Palsenberg
- Re: /dev/random probs in 2... H. Peter Anvin