Recent enabling of -D_FFR_TLS_O_T in revision 1.18 of src/etc/mail/Makefile
doesn't seem to sit well with access_db disabled; there are references to
the LookUpDomain ruleset which seem to need protected by _ACCESS_TABLE_ in
src/contrib/sendmail/cf/m4/proto.m4, but aren't, unless I'm missing somet
Mark Valentine wrote:
>
> Recent enabling of -D_FFR_TLS_O_T in revision 1.18 of src/etc/mail/Makefile
> doesn't seem to sit well with access_db disabled; there are references to
> the LookUpDomain ruleset which seem to need protected by _ACCESS_TABLE_ in
> src/contrib/sendmail/cf/m4/proto.m4, but
mark> Recent enabling of -D_FFR_TLS_O_T in revision 1.18 of
mark> src/etc/mail/Makefile doesn't seem to sit well with access_db
It was reverted yesterday when Nick Sayer posted the same problem in
freebsd-stable.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" i
if_ef.c in -CURRENT was broken (at least 2days ago) and wouldn't compile
here is a working one:
http://www.glassfish.net/~glassfish/if_ef.c.gz
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
I've never had this before, and I have traced the message to ufs/ffs/ffs_vnops.c on
line 634.
I have recently noticed [since my last svsup] that this is happening on boot and
shutdown [in which case, the messasge is also in
the same file, but for umount conditions].
I am not a filesystem exper
Jim Bryant wrote:
>
> I've never had this before, and I have traced the message to ufs/ffs/ffs_vnops.c on
>line 634.
>
> I have recently noticed [since my last svsup] that this is happening on boot and
>shutdown [in which case, the messasge is also in
> the same file, but for umount conditions
Hello, what can I do with this? I have had this panic for 2 or 4 months.
It happens when I do something like putting lots articles into
news-server. I know how to keep clear of this: make something big
(make build kernel or world). Ather this I can work for weeks...
today is a happy day: kernel d
Daniel Rock schrieb:
>
> Mike Smith schrieb:
> > > acpi0: on motherboard
> > > acpi0: power button is handled as a fixed feature programming model.
> > > acpi_timer0: timer test in progress, reboot to quit.
> > > acpi_timer0: timer is not monotonic: 0x1d52ab49,0x1d52ab4f,0x1d52ab4e
> > > acpi_ti
On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 03:13:58PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
# On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 01:39:14PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote:
# > what was going on, and given that scp doesn't support -1, was a bit of a
# > pain.
#
# Brian, what about adding "-1" to SCP?
I'm late in this thread, so I don't kno
Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 02:03:31AM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote:
> > Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > 1) For some reason, my mdmfs line in /etc/fstab always does a chmod
> > > 777 /tmp at mount-time
> > >
> > > /dev/md0/tmp
On Wed, 01 Aug 2001 09:39:58 MST, Dima Dorfman wrote:
> How about fixing mdmfs to be bug-compatible (eew, Microsoft term) with
> mount_mfs if it's called as "mount_*" (e.g., argv[0] is "mount_"), and
> be sane otherwise? I'll do this if people think that'd be okay.
People already have to lear
Sorry to jump in, but its seems odd, IMHO, to have a default of 777 for
permissions on a newly created fs. :) Shouldn't be something like 755?
For the record, I would also like to voice my support for "mount /tmp in
mfs". :)
A.
--
Antoine Beaupré
Jambala TCM team
Ericsson Canada inc.
mailto:[
Sheldon Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 01 Aug 2001 09:39:58 MST, Dima Dorfman wrote:
> > How about fixing mdmfs to be bug-compatible (eew, Microsoft term) with
> > mount_mfs if it's called as "mount_*" (e.g., argv[0] is "mount_"), and
> > be sane otherwise? I'll do this if people thi
usr.sbin/adduser/rmuser.perl has been broken since revision 1.18 on
2001/07/25. rev 1.21 (committed 2001/08/01) brought it back to life.
rmuser is similiarly broken in -stable and will be fixed after I get the
go-ahead from the release engineer.
Guy
Guy Helmer, Ph.D.
Sr. Software Engineer, Pali
Mike Smith schrieb:
> > acpi0: on motherboard
> > acpi0: power button is handled as a fixed feature programming model.
> > acpi_timer0: timer test in progress, reboot to quit.
> > acpi_timer0: timer is not monotonic: 0x1d52ab49,0x1d52ab4f,0x1d52ab4e
> > acpi_timer0: timer is not monotonic: 0x1d52
On Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:06:49 -1000, Vincent Poy wrote:
> Yeah, that's the weird part... I thought adding a DDB_UNATTENDED
> as a option would atleast make it reboot or something...
For the record, DDB_UNATTENDED is mostly pointless. It just sets the
default value of debug.debugger_on_pa
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
:
:
:On Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:06:49 -1000, Vincent Poy wrote:
:
:> Yeah, that's the weird part... I thought adding a DDB_UNATTENDED
:> as a option would atleast make it reboot or something...
:
:For the record, DDB_UNATTENDED is mostly pointless. It ju
On Wed, 01 Aug 2001 02:51:58 EST, David Scheidt wrote:
> Well, my current startup panic only happens at cold boot. After it panics
> the first time, it boots fine. If DDB_UNATTENED isn't set, it hangs trying
> to enter DDB.
!!!
That's a problem. Like I said, DDB_UNATTENDED is _mostly_ usel
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:06:49 -1000, Vincent Poy wrote:
>
> > Yeah, that's the weird part... I thought adding a DDB_UNATTENDED
> > as a option would atleast make it reboot or something...
>
> For the record, DDB_UNATTENDED is mostly pointless. It jus
19 matches
Mail list logo
