On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 01:58:43PM +0100, Jonathan Amery wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Branden writes:
> >> I can't believe he actually intends to keep it like this..
> >I'm going to #define DEV_RANDOM /dev/random for Linux systems.
>
> And Debian Hurd? Or does the Hurd not have /dev/r
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 01:50:59PM +0100, Jonathan Amery wrote:
> Actually, the standard configuration is that /dev/mem is read. The
> code to read from /dev/(u)random isn't activated in any situation in
> the standard upstream X distribution, and given that it contains an
> error that stops it f
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Jonathan Amery wrote:
>Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 13:58:43 +0100
>From: Jonathan Amery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], debian-x@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Re: a small C program to test xdm's /dev/mem reading on your
>architecture
>
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> B
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Branden writes:
>> I can't believe he actually intends to keep it like this..
>I'm going to #define DEV_RANDOM /dev/random for Linux systems.
And Debian Hurd? Or does the Hurd not have /dev/random or /dev/urandom?
I suspect that /dev/urandom may be the better cho
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kusti writes:
>I believe the /dev/mem gets read only in systems where no /dev/(u)random
>exists.
Actually, the standard configuration is that /dev/mem is read. The
code to read from /dev/(u)random isn't activated in any situation in
the standard upstream X distrib
[Apologies to readers of debian-sparc, who have already received a copy of this]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] write:
[XDM randomness]
>/dev/random? /dev/urandom? You are kidding. This randmomness is used
>to create authorisation cookies for X which in my understanding provide
6 matches
Mail list logo
