Hello,
i noticed httpdigest proto has been added to factotum.
I didn't noticed that.
The latest manual factotum(4) says nothing about httpdigest.
What browsers do you recommend to test http digest authentication ?
Mozilla is the best ?
http://plan9.aichi-u.ac.jp/pegasus/eman-2.0/
http://
Thanks.
> By the way, I don't think digest authentication is useful in case we
> want to protect some web contents from local users or other person's
> CGI.
i noticed httpdigest proto has been added to factotum. one of the
suggestions in the old thread was for each user to run its own httpd.
Hello,
I have been hesitated to support digest authentication in Pegasus
(another httpd for Plan9),
because I have been suspicious that digest authentication is not
widely supported by browsers.
If recent browsers are supporting digest authentication, I will try
to support it in Pegasus.
Run cvs up -dAP in $PLAN9 to get a bug fix from this morning.
Then ./INSTALL will work.
Russ
any clues ?
This is on a fresh install of FreeBSD 6.0, an version I have put p9p on before
but on a different processor.
fork# ./INSTALL
* Resetting /usr/local/plan9/config
* Building mk...
>>> pwd
>>> cd /usr/local/plan9/src/lib9
9c -Ifmt fmt/fltfmt.c
fmt/fltfmt.c:345: warning: 'c' might be us
has anyone done any cgi's that enforce digest authentication?
i need it to enforce access control to some content that needs to be
accessible by none; along these lines:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.plan9/browse_thread/thread/2d0acef2e2b85d5e/8166f4c14b6f9107?q=httpd+authentication&rnum
anyone thinking about this, could you consider restricting it
to the subset of Java libraries (and the few syntax restrictions)
that Google's web toolkit supports? That way it could be compiled
to HTML/Javascript using GWT compiler.
> I think there´s no problem. It´s not mine. It´s made by a stu
I think there´s no problem. It´s not mine. It´s made by a student
as one of his projects. I don´t have the source right now (I think he didn´t
copy it to our main file server). As soon as I get the source I´ll drop a line
here (it may take a few days).
Also, to avoid confussion, it´s a server-sid
On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 11:51:05AM +0200, Fco. J. Ballesteros wrote:
> : I believe that the current Styx will interoperate with 9P2000, but
> : haven't tried it myself.
>
> One of my students made a 9p library in Java, (I know...), and
> it can speak well with Inferno (no auth, though).
Nemo,
although i run plan 9 on my laptop, i have inferno on a USB keyfob which i can
plug into any random machine (windows, linux, ...) and get access to a
relatively
sane environment. i use it to connect back to plan 9 machines, or to data-bridge
across uncooperative local networks. i'm using it now f
what language are you using?
do you need a general 9p library or just a few bits?
- erik
On Fri May 26 12:04:27 CDT 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I know about that one, but it depends on too many external jars. I
> need a simple 9P2000 client library.
>
> On May 26, 2006, at 9:53 AM, Skip T
I know about that one, but it depends on too many external jars. I
need a simple 9P2000 client library.
On May 26, 2006, at 9:53 AM, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
How can I get that library. I started writing one myself, but if
the one you
mention is good enough, it will save me the effort :)
Th
> How can I get that library. I started writing one myself, but if the one you
> mention is good enough, it will save me the effort :)
>
> Thanks,
> Lucho
>
> On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 11:51:05AM +0200, Fco. J. Ballesteros said:
>> : I believe that the current Styx will interoperate with 9P2
Hi,
How can I get that library. I started writing one myself, but if the one you
mention is good enough, it will save me the effort :)
Thanks,
Lucho
On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 11:51:05AM +0200, Fco. J. Ballesteros said:
> : I believe that the current Styx will interoperate with 9P2000, but
the main technical difference is that inferno is designed to operate in a
single,
flat memory space. it relies on a well behaved virtual machine to avoid
processes
stamping on each others' memory (hence the use of Limbo rather than C - no
difficult
pointer arithmetic to check). this avoids the n
: I believe that the current Styx will interoperate with 9P2000, but
: haven't tried it myself.
One of my students made a 9p library in Java, (I know...), and
it can speak well with Inferno (no auth, though).
The Inferno kernel was created by modifying a then-current Plan 9
kernel. I believe that they do share device drivers, but the
Vitanuova folks can probably answer that better than I can.
See the Plan 9 and Inferno manuals and nemo's Plan 9 3rd edition
kernel commentary for design and implementati
On Friday 26 May 2006 00:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Inferno and Plan 9 kernels are similar, having common
> ancestry.
>
So Inferno and Plan 9 kernels are both forks from a common source?
How far have the two divurged? Do/can they share device drivers?
( Also, are there any design white-pap
Very briefly, Inferno and Plan 9 kernels are similar, having common
ancestry. Application programs on Inferno must be written in Limbo;
it's the only language supported. Application programs on Plan 9 are
usually written in C. Both systems use essentially 9P2000 as their
network filesystem protoc
However I'm curious:
When would one prefer/opt to use/deploy Plan9 over Inferno,
and/or vice versa?
As far as I've been able to tell, it appears that Inferno is pretty
much Plan9, but with a couple "additions" - namely: Limbo and
Dis - and thus a different development model. Do they both use
th
20 matches
Mail list logo
