> On 5. May 2018, at 11:12 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>
> A better answer would have been "Really sorry Theo and everyone, but I
> always come off as a dick..."
A double-standard is never a good idea. ;)
Cheers,
Franco
Hi Stuart et al.,
Sorry for the delay. Meanwhile, I've been reproducing the
issue on 6.3 by adding device rd and increasing MINIROOTSIZE
to grow the non-gdb amd64 kernel beyond 16 MB. The kernel
simply fails to boot.
> If the kernel should grow to a point where we run past some limit, we'll fix
> On 13. Mar 2018, at 4:04 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
>
> Franco Fichtner wrote:
>> What can we do to help?
>
> Write smaller code...
Fair enough. ;)
On a more serious note, I'm referring to:
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=112152576800634&w=2
"
Hi,
With regard to a commit[1] by Theo in 2013, several questions
in the years before and a partial lift of the limitation on
i386 a while back (2015?) I'd like to ask what the future plans
are for OpenBSD.
Peeking at NetBSD, where the amd64 was bootstrapped, they are at
48 MB kernel size at the
Hi,
Thanks for making this happen!
> On 28. Feb 2018, at 11:09 PM, T.J. Townsend wrote:
>
> Errata patches for a speculative execution flaw in Intel CPUs have been
> released for OpenBSD 6.2 and 6.1.
[...]
> Binary updates for the amd64 platform are available via the syspatch utility.
> Sourc
> On 2. Jul 2017, at 8:59 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
>
> If the username starts with a digit, but isn't a number, treat it like root.
I question the simplicity of this patch due to the fact that it leaves
no head room for further security-related regressions. Maybe more
progressive over-engineerin
Hi,
Apologies for not posting this inline for fear of mail
client whitespace mangling.
https://github.com/fichtner/openbsd/commit/05ab4bd.patch
ok?
Cheers,
Franco
> On 11. Apr 2017, at 4:09 PM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>
> Index: sysexits.3
> ===
> RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man3/sysexits.3,v
> retrieving revision 1.12
> diff -u -r1.12 sysexits.3
> --- sysexits.330 Dec 2015 16:41:52 -00
> On 24 Mar 2017, at 3:51 AM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>
> it is great that someone found a way to convert between licenses.
>
> AGPL -> GPL -> ISC -> PD
pfSense went through with this, being a 2-Clause BSD fork of m0n0wall,
going through a 6-Clause ESF and CLA (all your rights are belong to
us) t
> On 10 Mar 2017, at 4:43 PM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 04:26:24PM +0100, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote:
>
>> I think a small typo slipped in the 6.1 notes. Patch below:
>
> Nope, the actual new functions is called recallocarray...
Yup, and still a typo in one way or another:
Hi Ted,
Thanks, this is very helpful. Don't mind exploring other
routes as long as they are sustainable within OpenBSD, e.g.
if kernel changes are needed that they are provided by the
standard kernel eventually.
> On 3 Jan 2017, at 9:44 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
>
> Timo Buhrmester wrote:
>>> del
Hi,
Switching from net-snmp to OpenBSD's snmpd raised two
issues and I'd like to know if they make sense to address:
A pid file is missing. Would a patch for this be accepted?
The snmpd.conf can contain static values. If these values
are rewritten/changed over time by rewriting the config,
snm
Hi,
Is anyone aware or interested in porting vndcompress et al
from NetBSD to OpenBSD?
Is there any technical reason against inclusion?
We have a budget for this. If anyone is interested please
let me know.
Cheers,
Franco
> On 22 Jul 2016, at 7:58 PM, Mike Larkin wrote:
>
> What is your Hyper-V server host environment? Server 2012 R2? And I
> need a full dmesg from when this worked, please.
It's a Windows Server 2012 Datacenter Hyper-V failover cluster, controlled
by System Center 2012 Virtual Machine Manager.
Hi,
With a client we're running into the following boot panic
since upgrading from 5.7 to 5.9 on a specific Hyper-V guest:
cpu0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5420 @ 2.50GHz ("GenuineIntel" 686-class) 1.65 GHz
cpu0: FPU,V86,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CF
LUSH,MMX,FXSR,
On 08 May 2014, at 18:43, Alexandre Ratchov wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 12:35:56PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
>> This is wrong in several ways.
>>
>> Never cast sizeof down, always cast the comparison variable up.
>>
>> I'll specifically call out this change:
>>
>> -if (snprintf(buf, s
On 22 Apr 2014, at 18:32, Henning Brauer wrote:
> the binary has been trojan horsed.
Not sure if urban dictionary should be a terminology pool for manual
pages.
Also, there's clearly a hyphen missing: ``trojan-horsed''. No capital
T obviously since the term is common computer language and not
On 20 Nov 2013, at 21:40, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> FreeBSD and Dragonfly BSD have this option in tr. So, this actually
> improves portability.
>>>
>>> It's just spreading the disease. portable means it works everywhere.
>>> Increasing the number of people who can write nonportable code is
Hi Maxime,
On Jul 8, 2013, at 10:40 AM, Maxime Villard wrote:
> the static variables are not initialized?
Static variables are always zeroed when not specified otherwise.
Regards,
Franco
On Jul 4, 2013, at 6:43 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> fix: %x instead of %p for int
>
> ---
> sys/dev/pci/musycc_obsd.c |2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git sys/dev/pci/musycc_obsd.c sys/dev/pci/musycc_obsd.c
> index 25a58d8..0844136 100644
> --- sys/dev/pci
You are right, my mistake. The previous patch was the consistency
patch, but this one actually does what the subject says. The motivation
behind it was the fact that rb trees *almost* support this and I can't
see any harm. The same could be done for splay trees, but I found this
too intrusive wi
Hi all,
adhering to the basic rule of not reinventing the wheel has sort of
crippled the efforts to come up with an elegant solution for the
topic at hand. Two approaches have been proposed earlier, so let's
go through them:
(1) Diverting traffic to userspace
That's generally a good idea, but d
Hi,
I've had this patch in my tree for a while. It's just a consistency
fix so that cmp can be a plain macro for rb-trees, too.
Regards,
Franco
Index: tree.h
===
RCS file: /OpenBSD/src/sys/sys/tree.h,v
retrieving revision 1.13
dif
Hi,
found this while reading up on recent changes to -current.
Genuine cvs diff this time. ;)
Regards,
Franco
Index: octeonreg.h
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch/octeon/include/octeonreg.h,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -r1.1 oc
On May 2, 2013, at 3:20 PM, Damien Miller wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2013, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>
>> OK, the implementation only pulls a couple of bytes from the packet's
>> payload. It will never pull bytes that are not verified. It will never
>> allocate anythin
On May 2, 2013, at 2:40 PM, Damien Miller wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2013, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>
>> Moving implementations to user space does not necessarily make them
>> better or less of a problem.
>
> The big difference is that its possible to sandbox a userspace
On May 2, 2013, at 1:23 PM, Damien Miller wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2013, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>
>>> Well, bare minimum complexity per-protocol * large_number_of_protocols =
>>> a lot of complexity. The incentive is always going to be to add more
>>> protocol
On May 2, 2013, at 10:45 AM, Damien Miller wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2013, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>
>> as stated before, breaking down complexity to the bare minimum is my
>> requirement for this to be happening at all. You all get to be the
>> judges. I'm just tryi
Hi Damien,
On May 2, 2013, at 10:03 AM, Damien Miller wrote:
> On Wed, 1 May 2013, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>
>> Not sure if that's a fitting comparison; and I know too little OSPF
>> to answer. Let me try another route. The logic consists of an array
>> of ap
On May 1, 2013, at 9:41 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> I should have expanded the acronum to make it clear - osfp i.e. the
> OS fingerprinting code (pf_osfp.c).
oh, sorry, my mistake. This I can comment on. :)
The idea is the same. I'd say at this stage osfp has more complexity
due to parsing
Hi Ted,
On May 1, 2013, at 1:14 AM, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 00:16, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>> Yes, I am proposing a lightweight approach: hard-wired regex-like
>> code, no allocations, no reassembly or state machines. I've seen
>> far worse things
Hi Stuart,
On May 1, 2013, at 1:11 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2013/05/01 00:16, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I am proposing a lightweight approach: hard-wired regex-like
>> code, no allocations, no reassembly or state machines. I've seen
>> far wor
Hi Alexey,
On Apr 30, 2013, at 11:51 PM, "Alexey E. Suslikov"
wrote:
> Franco Fichtner gmail.com> writes:
>
>> so I have been working on a BSD licensed DPI engine. It's a
>> very lightweight, non-intrusive approach and I know that teasers
>> are
Hi misc@,
so I have been working on a BSD licensed DPI engine. It's a
very lightweight, non-intrusive approach and I know that teasers
are boring, but I'd like to know if it's worth the time to
work on inclusion for pf(4). So far I have about 25 supported
applications and the necessary hooks for
On Apr 27, 2013, at 9:28 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:09:25PM +0200, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>> On backtrace(3) (which is a GNU thing, I know), static functions don't
>> show up with their respective names even though they are in the binary.
>
On Apr 27, 2013, at 7:36 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 08:10, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 01:08:06AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
>>
>>> Adding static to internal function allows the compiler to better
>>> detect dead code (functions, variables, etc) and makes
On 28.03.2013, at 13:17, Daniel Bolgheroni wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 05:46:30AM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
>>
>> You can't say in substance "it's a pity OpenBSD doesn't support the VAX
>> 11/780 anymore" in one mail, "you guys really ought to ditch floppy
>> installation media" in another,
On Mar 26, 2013, at 11:11 PM, Creamy wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 10:50:40PM +0400, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>> Nobody in their right mind would have such a system as
>> mission critical infrastructure. :)
>
> What, like using a Honeywell 316 as a nuclear power station
On Mar 26, 2013, at 10:06 PM, Creamy wrote:
>>> Looking to the future, when are we going to drop 486 support, anyway?
>>
>> Now, that's a more interesting thing ask.
>
> How much of the hardware survives now, anyway? I mean at least the old
> Vaxen were, (and are), maintainable. 486 motherboa
On Mar 26, 2013, at 6:26 PM, Creamy wrote:
>> but I honestly question the utility of any of these ISA
>> network and SCSI drivers.
>
> Perhaps somebody who is new to coding might be able to learn something
> from them?
There is such a vast amount of code in the different BSD flavours
alone that
On Feb 17, 2013, at 6:45 PM, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 03:59:41PM +0100, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> found this still lingering in my tree. Still trying to figure out
>> the best workflow for sending patches. Not sure if th
Hi all,
found this still lingering in my tree. Still trying to figure out
the best workflow for sending patches. Not sure if this adheres
to the standards.
Thanks,
Franco
---
share/man/man3/tree.3 | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/share/man/man3/tree.3 b/share/m
On Nov 26, 2012, at 9:44 PM, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> Todd T. Fries wrote:
>
>> If there are desires to improve this (I hear Naddy grumbling!) then the
>> stomach to break backwards compat must be present, or suggestions on how
>> to do it without breaking backwards compat must be suggeste
On Nov 15, 2012, at 5:53 PM, Reyk Floeter wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Marc Espie wrote:
>> external people regularly ask "but why you don't want to use GNU/m4 GNU/make
>> GNU/whatever ?"
>>
>
> External people seem to ask weird questions.
>
> I just had to dig into autoconf/aut
Hi tech@,
I noticed RB_GENERATE_INTERNAL in src/sys/sys/tree.h
puts brackets around the compare function cmp in
RB_INSERT just like SPLAY_GENERATE_INTERNAL does.
However, RB_FIND and RB_NFIND don't do this. Is
there any reason we need (cmp) expressions at all? It
prevents macros from being used in
On Aug 15, 2012, at 8:17 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 13:25, Ted Unangst wrote:
>
> I will probably rename this just "tsc" after some prodding from mikeb,
> that's a better name. I tend to focus on the instruction used, but we
> should name it after the counter.
>
>> +r
On Apr 22, 2012, at 9:32 PM, Christiano F. Haesbaert wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 09:16:57PM +0200, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>> On Apr 22, 2012, at 7:58 PM, Christiano F. Haesbaert wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 06:36:41PM +0200, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>>>
On Apr 22, 2012, at 7:58 PM, Christiano F. Haesbaert wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 06:36:41PM +0200, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>> Just being paranoid... strncmp?
>
> Why ? It's a terminated string vs a string literal, what do you wanna
> use as the third argument: strlen(
Just being paranoid... strncmp? And how about consolidating style while at it?
"!" vs. "== 0" - see code bits below change.
Franco
On 22.04.2012, at 15:12, "Christiano F. Haesbaert"
wrote:
> There's no need for doing that somewhat strange comparison, the rest
> of the code already uses cpu_vend
49 matches
Mail list logo