FreeBSD license plate

[Andrew J Caines]

For your amusement, I now have



Actually, they also have the big grey "Powered by... FreeBSD" sticker to
the right of the letters, the mustard yellow square one on the bottom left
(under the yellow square date sticker in the top left) and round
green-blue one in the bottom right corner.


-Andrew-
-- 
 ___
| -Andrew J. Caines-   Unix Systems Engineer   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  |
| "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary |
|  safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin, 1759 |

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Request for subscription

[srinivas k]

Hello respected Sir,
  i'm really interested in joining to the FreeBSD group.
please subscribe for me to the same. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
thanking u.

Srinivas.

_
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

scheduling

[Anjali Kulkarni]

I forgot to mention, the kernel is 4.3 so it runs 
to completion, (no pre-emption). I just want to know if ksched_yield can be used 
like the general purpose 'yield', which did yield in the kernel.
 
Anjali

scheduling

[Anjali Kulkarni]

Hi,
 
I am trying to use the sched_yield/ksched_yield 
 function in the kernel, and it returns a success value, but actually does 
not yield to another process. I suppose this is because the kernel process is 
higher priority than any user level process??(Like I try and login from another 
terminal but it has hanged, untill the kernel process returns, I cannot use any 
other screen.)
 
Thanks,
Anjali

IPSEC code error

[Terry Lambert]

On a related topic, there appears to be a code error in the
IPSEC code.

Specifically, the priv flag is set to 1 if the user is root
and the socket is non-null (this lets the code be called
from the bridging code as well, so ignore the first half of
the "if" test, and concentrate on the "uid == 0" test).

In the code that examines this flag, the comment is that it
is looking at whether or not the port is a priviledged port,
not whether or not the user who owns it is root.

This implies that the "rootness" check improperly flags any
ports opened by root, regardless of whether or not they are
priviledged ports.

Is the code where the flag is initialized correct, or is the
comment where the flag is observed correct?

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

IPSEC sucking up memory

[Terry Lambert]

While investigating a problem, I noticed that the IPSEC code
is initializing the sp -- even when no one is using IPSEC.

Is there a good reason why this is not late-bound, and the
IPSEC code is initializing and copying and checking the
security policy pointer, even in the absense of actual use
of security over socket links?

It turns out that this really, really bloats the per socket
memory requirements, with the only real result being a lot
of extra processing that could be replaced by a pointer is
not NULL check.

It seems to me that this could be handled in the TCP, UDP,
and IP userreq code by only initializing the thing in the
case that a policy has been set.  Is there some reason why
this can't be done?

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message