[no subject]

> Hello folks, > > I'd like to know if somebody is interested in looking into porting the > Nouveau open-source Nvidia graphics driver to OpenBSD. I realize it > requires the cooperation of the Nvidia company. And if it is already in the > works, it would be great if you could let me know. > > Si

Re: Upgrading from already downloaded sets is broken?

I also hit that problem when upgrading current. A few chmod ugo+x on directories and chmod ugo+r on files and dirs later everything worked correctly. But I have known from this thread ahead that this is about dropped privileges.

Re: KASSERT((sk->inp == NULL) || (sk->inp->inp_pf_sk == NULL));

This is the same error I have from time to time. I posted about it with title: "Kernel panic pf.c during halting" on tech list. Actually for me this is the case when I turn off computer via sudo halt -p. For me there is not need for heavy load. What's the output of ifconfig and route -n show for

Re: Synchronous and asynchronous FFS at the same time

Anyway I was experimenting more and discovered something against docs. These time I created newfs on pendrive so if fs get corrupted it will not break nothing. It will be dd-zeroed and formatted anyway. Manual of mount says: The options async and softdep are mutually exclusive. But I have discov

Re: Synchronous and asynchronous FFS at the same time

You mean using async? I don't usually use async. I did used async a few times today experimenting with mount /home with no intention to use async later. Fortunately crash have not happened during these experiments. Actually noasync is redundant for this script, because I don't use async in fstab.

Re: Synchronous and asynchronous FFS at the same time

So I should do something like that: sudo /sbin/mount -u -o noasync,sync,rw,nodev,nosuid,noatime /home Sorry for this bug report.

Synchronous and asynchronous FFS at the same time

Sometimes I have crash (unrelated to this bug) during halt -p, so I decided to remount /home as sync just before I execute halt -p. During testing I have discovered unexpected behaviour of mount(8). Mount is printing that I have FFS filesystem mounted as asynchronous and synchronous at the same ti

Re: Relayd TLS bug, CA file, relay doesn't start

I should post this message under this subject, not Re: Relayd TLS client mode CA verification. # Unfortunately relayd still has this bug. I have: sysctl kern.version kern.version=OpenBSD 6.0-beta (GENERIC.MP) #2198: Sun Jun 19 11:58:45 MDT

Re: Relayd TLS client mode CA verification

Unfortunately relayd still has this bug. I have: sysctl kern.version kern.version=OpenBSD 6.0-beta (GENERIC.MP) #2198: Sun Jun 19 11:58:45 MDT 2016 r...@amd64.openbsd.org:/usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC.MP As was said: if desti

Re: ext2fs, maybe fsck, bug in current 5.9 beta

I have tested "pure OpenBSD" way to reproduce problem and I can confirm that in this configuration bug is fixed. sysctl kern.version kern.version=OpenBSD 5.9-current (GENERIC.MP) #2002: Sun May 1 06:35:58 MDT 2016 dera..

Re: Relayd TLS client mode CA verification

I have tested on latest snapshot (April 18) and it is still not working correctly with default cert.pem. Workaround is good is some use cases but in others I can not predict destinations (forward to destination) so preloading smaller certificate file is not an option. # dmesg OpenBSD 5.9-current (

Re: Relayd TLS client mode CA verification

certificate into cert.pem file. Od: "trondd" Do: m...@openbsd.org; Wysłane: 5:07 Poniedziałek 2016-03-28 Temat: Re: Relayd TLS client mode CA verification > On Sat, March 26, 2016 6:45 am, Lampshade wrote: > > I have reported problem to bugs mailing list. > > Thanks for c

Relayd TLS bug, CA file, relay doesn't start

012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789 I have: OpenBSD-current amd64 March 16th, 2016. I am not the only one who can reproduce bug. Trondd also can reproduce bug, which was confirmed on misc mail-list. If "tls ca file " is specified, relayd starts, but relay actually is not

Re: Relayd in TlsClient mode accepts TLSv1 and TLSv1.1

Thanks for answer. I have tried to reproduce connection today with simpler tools and instead of Chromium I have used echo and nc. Frankly I must admit that relayd fails to connect, so it is good. My rules just don't intercept connections on lo0 interface and don't tried to intercept on ports oth

Relayd in TlsClient mode accepts TLSv1 and TLSv1.1

I have reported this to misc with subject Relayd as a HTTPS client but no one replied. On snapshot January 7, 2016 amd64 relayd accepts connections using TLS in versions 1.1 and 1.0. It is true even if you just do something like: relay SendReencryptNormal { listen on 127.0.0.1 port 7443

ext2fs, maybe fsck, bug in current 5.9 beta

Hello I have reproductible problem on snapshots dated 18,19 and 23 December 2015. I haven't tested older versions. sysctl kern.version kern.version=OpenBSD 5.9-beta (GENERIC.MP) #1778: Wed Dec 23 18:23:06 MST 2015 dera...@amd64.openbsd