Re: ncurses message spam

On Fri 21 Jun 15:23, Shawn Webb wrote: > Hey all, > > With the recent changes to ncurses in base, I'm getting a bunch of > messages (snippet below) on every single new PTY. Every time I open a > new window in tmux or login via ssh, I'm getting spammed with a flood > of messages like below. > >

ncurses message spam

Hey all, With the recent changes to ncurses in base, I'm getting a bunch of messages (snippet below) on every single new PTY. Every time I open a new window in tmux or login via ssh, I'm getting spammed with a flood of messages like below. BEGIN LOG Name collision 'tvi950-b' between

Re: Spam mail being sent via the FreeBSD mailing lists

5/26/21 1:34 PM, Kurt Jaeger wrote: Hi! On May 25, 2021, at 8:53 PM, jake h wrote: I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your phone has a virus, Ads, Fake blackmail, so on and so forth. H

Re: Spam mail being sent via the FreeBSD mailing lists

On 2021-05-26 22:50:57 (+0800), Julian H. Stacey wrote: Kurt Jaeger wrote: Hi! On May 25, 2021, at 8:53 PM, jake h wrote: I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your phone has a virus

Re: Spam mail being sent via the FreeBSD mailing lists

from Kurt Jaeger: > Hi! > > > On May 25, 2021, at 8:53 PM, jake h wrote: > > > I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via > > > this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your > > > pho

Re: Spam mail being sent via the FreeBSD mailing lists

Kurt Jaeger wrote: > Hi! > > > On May 25, 2021, at 8:53 PM, jake h wrote: > > > I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via > > > this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your > > > phone has a virus,

Re: Spam mail being sent via the FreeBSD mailing lists

Hi! > > On May 25, 2021, at 8:53 PM, jake h wrote: > > I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via > > this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your > > phone has a virus, Ads, Fake blackmail, so on and so fo

Re: Spam mail being sent via the FreeBSD mailing lists

> On May 25, 2021, at 8:53 PM, jake h wrote: > > I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via > this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your > phone has a virus, Ads, Fake blackmail, so on and so forth. > Has anyone else

Re: Spam mail being sent via the FreeBSD mailing lists

I got one this morning Blackmail stuff - just delete it. > On May 25, 2021, at 4:52 PM, jake h wrote: > > Hi everyone, > I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via > this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your > phon

Spam mail being sent via the FreeBSD mailing lists

Hi everyone, I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your phone has a virus, Ads, Fake blackmail, so on and so forth. Has anyone else noticed these spam emails, or is it just me? Thanks, Jake

Re: How to delete comment spam from bugzilla?

Hello, From: Alan Somers Subject: How to delete comment spam from bugzilla? Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:31:01 -0600 > Somebody, or more likely some bot, is posting comment spam in our > bugzilla. How can we delete spammy comments ? I faced same situation before and was told to sen

How to delete comment spam from bugzilla?

Somebody, or more likely some bot, is posting comment spam in our bugzilla. How can we delete spammy comments ? ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail

Re: console spam during mergemaster

On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 7:05 AM, O. Hartmann wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > Am Sun, 29 Jul 2018 08:58:47 -0400 > Michael Butler schrieb: > > > This started a few days ago .. no apparent ill effect but still annoying > .. > > > > *** Creating the temporary root

Re: console spam during mergemaster

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Am Sun, 29 Jul 2018 08:58:47 -0400 Michael Butler schrieb: > This started a few days ago .. no apparent ill effect but still annoying .. > > *** Creating the temporary root environment in /var/tmp/temproot > *** /var/tmp/temproot ready for use >

console spam during mergemaster

This started a few days ago .. no apparent ill effect but still annoying .. *** Creating the temporary root environment in /var/tmp/temproot *** /var/tmp/temproot ready for use *** Creating and populating directory structure in /var/tmp/temproot make[4]: "/usr/src/share/mk/bsd.dirs.mk" line

Spam in console after r336593 (NFS mounted)

Hello. After https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision=336593 any make action starting spam errors (svn not work on NFS mounted partitions) svn: E155016: The working copy database at '/usr/src' is corrupt. svn: E155016: The working copy database at '/usr/src' is corrupt. make[2]: "/us

Re: DNSSEC/Log Spam for partially DNSSEC domain

On 30 Jun 2018, at 04:03, Larry Rosenman wrote: > > I'm running Exim, with DNSSEC enabled, and my zone (lerctr.org) is > DNSSEC signed, but my dyn.lerctr.org subdomain is NOT DNSSEC signed due > to HE.net don't support DNSSEC. > > I get a ton of: > Jun 29 20:12:53 thebighonker exim[37649]:

Re: DNSSEC/Log Spam for partially DNSSEC domain

On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 07:33:02PM -0700, Michael Mitchell wrote: > /etc/syslog.conf maybe > > mdm - from a phone > That won't help, as I don't want to suppress ALL of the nastygrams. I'm looking for more selectivity from this in libc. -- Larry Rosenman

Re: DNSSEC/Log Spam for partially DNSSEC domain

On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 08:29:48PM -0700, Michael Mitchell wrote: > pick the right options for the daemon and info level? Nope, it's just this message which is annoying. -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 214-642-9640 E-Mail:

Re: DNSSEC/Log Spam for partially DNSSEC domain

pick the right options for the daemon and info level? mdm - from a phone On Fri, Jun 29, 2018, 8:00 PM Larry Rosenman wrote: > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 07:33:02PM -0700, Michael Mitchell wrote: > > /etc/syslog.conf maybe > > > > mdm - from a phone > > > That won't help, as I don't want to

Re: DNSSEC/Log Spam for partially DNSSEC domain

/etc/syslog.conf maybe mdm - from a phone On Fri, Jun 29, 2018, 7:27 PM Larry Rosenman wrote: > I'm running Exim, with DNSSEC enabled, and my zone (lerctr.org) is > DNSSEC signed, but my dyn.lerctr.org subdomain is NOT DNSSEC signed due > to HE.net don't support DNSSEC. > > I get a ton of: >

DNSSEC/Log Spam for partially DNSSEC domain

I'm running Exim, with DNSSEC enabled, and my zone (lerctr.org) is DNSSEC signed, but my dyn.lerctr.org subdomain is NOT DNSSEC signed due to HE.net don't support DNSSEC. I get a ton of: Jun 29 20:12:53 thebighonker exim[37649]: gethostby*.gethostanswer: asked for "borg.lerctr.org IN ", got

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On Thu., 22 Dec. 2016 at 12:45 am, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > That was my failure and already fixed. > Thanks for the fix! For those of us playing along at home, I believe the fix can in r310032. https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision=310032 Regards, Ben

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:03:14AM +0100, Eivind Nicolay Evensen wrote: E> E> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 09:48:59AM -0600, Eric van Gyzen wrote: E> > On 12/13/2016 09:24, Michael Butler wrote: E> > > Any hints as to why all of my -current equipment is complaining like below. Is E> > > there a

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 09:48:59AM -0600, Eric van Gyzen wrote: > On 12/13/2016 09:24, Michael Butler wrote: > > Any hints as to why all of my -current equipment is complaining like below. > > Is > > there a sysctl to moderate/turn this off? > > > > Dec 13 10:00:01 archive kernel: Limiting icmp

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:07:19AM -0500, Michael Butler wrote: M> >> Any hints as to why all of my -current equipment is complaining like below. Is M> >> there a sysctl to moderate/turn this off? M> >> M> >> Dec 13 10:00:01 archive kernel: Limiting icmp unreach response from 1 to 200 M> >>

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On 2016-12-13 10:24, Michael Butler wrote: > Any hints as to why all of my -current equipment is complaining like > below. Is there a sysctl to moderate/turn this off? > > Dec 13 10:00:01 archive kernel: Limiting icmp unreach response from 1 to > 200 packets/sec > Dec 13 10:00:21 archive last

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:19:18AM -0500, Michael Butler wrote: > On 12/13/16 11:15, Gary Palmer wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:43:27AM -0500, Michael Butler wrote: > >> On 12/13/16 10:29, Dimitry Andric wrote: > >> > >>> Somebody is most likely port scanning your machines. I see this all

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:07:19AM -0500, Michael Butler wrote: M> On 12/13/16 10:48, Eric van Gyzen wrote: M> > On 12/13/2016 09:24, Michael Butler wrote: M> >> Any hints as to why all of my -current equipment is complaining like below. Is M> >> there a sysctl to moderate/turn this off? M> >> M>

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On 12/13/16 11:15, Gary Palmer wrote: On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:43:27AM -0500, Michael Butler wrote: On 12/13/16 10:29, Dimitry Andric wrote: Somebody is most likely port scanning your machines. I see this all the time on boxes connected to the internet. As are mine. I wouldn't mind so

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:43:27AM -0500, Michael Butler wrote: > On 12/13/16 10:29, Dimitry Andric wrote: > > > Somebody is most likely port scanning your machines. I see this all the > > time on boxes connected to the internet. > > As are mine. I wouldn't mind so much if the message contained

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On 12/13/16 10:48, Eric van Gyzen wrote: On 12/13/2016 09:24, Michael Butler wrote: Any hints as to why all of my -current equipment is complaining like below. Is there a sysctl to moderate/turn this off? Dec 13 10:00:01 archive kernel: Limiting icmp unreach response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On 2016/12/13 15:43, Michael Butler wrote: > On 12/13/16 10:29, Dimitry Andric wrote: > >> Somebody is most likely port scanning your machines. I see this all the >> time on boxes connected to the internet. > > As are mine. I wouldn't mind so much if the message contained sufficient > useful

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On 12/13/2016 09:24, Michael Butler wrote: > Any hints as to why all of my -current equipment is complaining like below. Is > there a sysctl to moderate/turn this off? > > Dec 13 10:00:01 archive kernel: Limiting icmp unreach response from 1 to 200 > packets/sec > Dec 13 10:00:21 archive last

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On 12/13/16 10:29, Dimitry Andric wrote: Somebody is most likely port scanning your machines. I see this all the time on boxes connected to the internet. As are mine. I wouldn't mind so much if the message contained sufficient useful information that could be acted on, e.g. originating IP

Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

On 13 Dec 2016, at 16:24, Michael Butler wrote: > > Any hints as to why all of my -current equipment is complaining like below. Somebody is most likely port scanning your machines. I see this all the time on boxes connected to the internet. > Is there a sysctl to

Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec

Any hints as to why all of my -current equipment is complaining like below. Is there a sysctl to moderate/turn this off? Dec 13 10:00:01 archive kernel: Limiting icmp unreach response from 1 to 200 packets/sec Dec 13 10:00:21 archive last message repeated 13 times Dec 13 10:02:21 archive last

New spam on all my current machine consoles

HV_KVP: open /dev/hv_kvp_dev failed; error: 2 No such file or directory I assume that there is missing error handling in or logic here somewhere as every one of my machines is spamming my consoles on startup with this new message. sean ___

Re: New spam on all my current machine consoles

On Sep 16, 2014, at 11:40, Sean Bruno sbr...@ignoranthack.me wrote: HV_KVP: open /dev/hv_kvp_dev failed; error: 2 No such file or directory I assume that there is missing error handling in or logic here somewhere as every one of my machines is spamming my consoles on startup with this

Re: New spam on all my current machine consoles

On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 11:45 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: On Sep 16, 2014, at 11:40, Sean Bruno sbr...@ignoranthack.me wrote: HV_KVP: open /dev/hv_kvp_dev failed; error: 2 No such file or directory I assume that there is missing error handling in or logic here somewhere as every one

Re: New spam on all my current machine consoles

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 11:40:15AM -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: HV_KVP: open /dev/hv_kvp_dev failed; error: 2 No such file or directory I assume that there is missing error handling in or logic here somewhere as every one of my machines is spamming my consoles on startup with this new message.

Re: New spam on all my current machine consoles

On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 21:57 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 11:40:15AM -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: HV_KVP: open /dev/hv_kvp_dev failed; error: 2 No such file or directory I assume that there is missing error handling in or logic here somewhere as every one of my

Re: New spam on all my current machine consoles

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:08:54PM -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 21:57 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 11:40:15AM -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: HV_KVP: open /dev/hv_kvp_dev failed; error: 2 No such file or directory I assume that there is missing

Re: New spam on all my current machine consoles

On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 22:27 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:08:54PM -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 21:57 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 11:40:15AM -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: HV_KVP: open /dev/hv_kvp_dev failed; error:

Any recent spam that states it is from me is not.

Please check the headers and then ask me. This is for those who may assume that I do such things. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On 2013-Dec-22 11:53:17 -0800, Darren Pilgrim list_free...@bluerosetech.com wrote: Because of that deinstall log. When you use `pkg install` to upgrade a port, you get something like this: Jul 10 23:06:40 chombo pkg-static: ca_root_nss-3.15.1 installed Nov 29 15:04:52 chombo pkg: ca_root_nss

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 10:16:44PM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote: On 2013-Dec-22 11:53:17 -0800, Darren Pilgrim list_free...@bluerosetech.com wrote: Because of that deinstall log. When you use `pkg install` to upgrade a port, you get something like this: Jul 10 23:06:40 chombo pkg-static:

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 12:41:31PM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 10:16:44PM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote: On 2013-Dec-22 11:53:17 -0800, Darren Pilgrim list_free...@bluerosetech.com wrote: Because of that deinstall log. When you use `pkg install` to upgrade a

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 11:06:34AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 12:41:31PM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 10:16:44PM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote: On 2013-Dec-22 11:53:17 -0800, Darren Pilgrim list_free...@bluerosetech.com wrote: Because of

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

The point is that some people like an audit trail. The audit trail for some people involves remote logging of syslog messages to a log host. This would include when packages are installed. -adrian On 21 December 2013 15:49, Steve Kargl s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu wrote: On Sat, Dec 21,

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

Steve, On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 12:14:03PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: S It did not ask how to stop this stupidity. I asked to have S this stupidity stopped by default. The spewing of this S information in /var/log/messages provides NOTHING. Please S turn it off by default. I am really

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

create a repository configuration file Yeah, I noticed that spam along with the spam that is being spewed to /var/log/messaage, e.g., Dec 21 10:27:28 laptop-kargl pkg-static: libwpg-0.2.2 installed Dec 21 10:31:15 laptop-kargl pkg-static: libcdr-0.0.14 installed Dec 21 10:32:35 laptop-kargl pkg

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

message spammed a lot: pkg: PACKAGESITE in pkg.conf is deprecated. Please create a repository configuration file Yeah, I noticed that spam along with the spam that is being spewed to /var/log/messaage, e.g., Dec 21 10:27:28 laptop-kargl pkg-static: libwpg-0.2.2 installed Dec 21 10:31

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

: PACKAGESITE in pkg.conf is deprecated. Please create a repository configuration file Yeah, I noticed that spam along with the spam that is being spewed to /var/log/messaage, e.g., Dec 21 10:27:28 laptop-kargl pkg-static: libwpg-0.2.2 installed Dec 21 10:31:15 laptop-kargl pkg-static: libcdr

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On 22/12/2013 14:55, olli hauer wrote: What I agree is having it would be nice to have dedicated syslog (like yum.log) instead /var/log/messages since this is already spammed by most every process. Add something like this to /etc/syslog.conf: !pkg *.* /var/log/pkg.log

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On 22/12/2013 16:08, Matthew Seaman wrote: On 22/12/2013 14:55, olli hauer wrote: What I agree is having it would be nice to have dedicated syslog (like yum.log) instead /var/log/messages since this is already spammed by most every process. Add something like this to /etc/syslog.conf:

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sat, 2013-12-21 at 15:25 -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:16:00AM +0100, Julien Laffaye wrote: On 12/22/2013 12:04 AM, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 11:14:39PM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: this has been done and activated for reason, first for lot

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sun, 22 Dec 2013, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 09:00:42AM -0500, Frank Seltzer wrote: /root # man pkg.conf No manual entry for pkg.conf pkg.conf man pages comes with pkg itself, just bootstrap it and you will get the manpage :) regards, Bapt OK, my bad, I did

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 15:48:49 +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: Steve, On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 12:14:03PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: S It did not ask how to stop this stupidity. I asked to have S this stupidity stopped by default. The spewing of this S information in /var/log/messages provides

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

file Glen Barber replied: echo 'SYSLOG: no' /usr/local/etc/pkg.conf And Shane Ambler: now we can turn it off which I don't think we could before. All of this is mostly off-topic. I haven't had any opposition to logging. Instead, I originally thought that the PACKAGESITE spam was a result

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On 12/22/2013 6:00 AM, Frank Seltzer wrote: Adrian Chadd said: The point is that some people like an audit trail. The audit trail for some people involves remote logging of syslog messages to a log host. This would include when packages are installed. There are two more: 1. When a port was

PACKAGESITE spam

I've just installed a very recent -CURRENT, and now I'm performing a big portupgrade procedure. I get the following message spammed a lot: pkg: PACKAGESITE in pkg.conf is deprecated. Please create a repository configuration file ___

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

Yeah, I noticed that spam along with the spam that is being spewed to /var/log/messaage, e.g., Dec 21 10:27:28 laptop-kargl pkg-static: libwpg-0.2.2 installed Dec 21 10:31:15 laptop-kargl pkg-static: libcdr-0.0.14 installed Dec 21 10:32:35 laptop-kargl pkg-static: openjpeg-1.5.0_2 installed Dec

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

in pkg.conf is deprecated. Please create a repository configuration file Yeah, I noticed that spam along with the spam that is being spewed to /var/log/messaage, e.g., Dec 21 10:27:28 laptop-kargl pkg-static: libwpg-0.2.2 installed Dec 21 10:31:15 laptop-kargl pkg-static: libcdr-0.0.14 installed

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

the following message spammed a lot: pkg: PACKAGESITE in pkg.conf is deprecated. Please create a repository configuration file Yeah, I noticed that spam along with the spam that is being spewed to /var/log/messaage, e.g., Dec 21 10:27:28 laptop-kargl pkg-static: libwpg-0.2.2

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

a big portupgrade procedure. I get the following message spammed a lot: pkg: PACKAGESITE in pkg.conf is deprecated. Please create a repository configuration file Yeah, I noticed that spam along with the spam that is being spewed to /var/log/messaage, e.g., Dec 21 10:27:28 laptop-kargl pkg

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

a big portupgrade procedure. I get the following message spammed a lot: pkg: PACKAGESITE in pkg.conf is deprecated. Please create a repository configuration file Yeah, I noticed that spam along with the spam that is being spewed to /var/log/messaage, e.g., Dec 21 10:27:28 laptop-kargl pkg

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 02:54:39PM -0600, Greg Rivers wrote: On Sat, 21 Dec 2013, Steve Kargl wrote: It did not ask how to stop this stupidity. I asked to have this stupidity stopped by default. The spewing of this information in /var/log/messages provides NOTHING. Please turn it off

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On 12/21/2013 1:05 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 02:54:39PM -0600, Greg Rivers wrote: On Sat, 21 Dec 2013, Steve Kargl wrote: It did not ask how to stop this stupidity. I asked to have this stupidity stopped by default. The spewing of this information in /var/log/messages

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 01:24:55PM -0800, Darren Pilgrim wrote: On 12/21/2013 1:05 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 02:54:39PM -0600, Greg Rivers wrote: On Sat, 21 Dec 2013, Steve Kargl wrote: It did not ask how to stop this stupidity. I asked to have this stupidity

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 01:39:59PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 01:24:55PM -0800, Darren Pilgrim wrote: On 12/21/2013 1:05 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 02:54:39PM -0600, Greg Rivers wrote: On Sat, 21 Dec 2013, Steve Kargl wrote: It did not ask

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 11:14:39PM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: this has been done and activated for reason, first for lot of companies, companies can turn it on it they want it. secondly I receive tons of request to actiavte on by default while you are the first to request it off by

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On 12/22/2013 12:04 AM, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 11:14:39PM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: this has been done and activated for reason, first for lot of companies, companies can turn it on it they want it. And if you want to save the few extra kB, you can turn it off...

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:16:00AM +0100, Julien Laffaye wrote: On 12/22/2013 12:04 AM, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 11:14:39PM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: this has been done and activated for reason, first for lot of companies, companies can turn it on it they want it.

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On 12/22/2013 12:25 AM, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:16:00AM +0100, Julien Laffaye wrote: On 12/22/2013 12:04 AM, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 11:14:39PM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: this has been done and activated for reason, first for lot of companies,

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On 22/12/13 00:04, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 11:14:39PM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: Other than the noise in /var/log/message, what does this provide that 'pkg info' doesn't! Please turn of this feature by default. No please don't, it's a very useful feature, you can

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 06:29:17PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote: In article 20131221230448.ga61...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu, Steve Kargl writes: Other than the noise in /var/log/message, what does this provide that 'pkg info' doesn't! A record of when packages were installed and

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 03:44:11PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 06:29:17PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote: In article 20131221230448.ga61...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu, Steve Kargl writes: Other than the noise in /var/log/message, what does this provide that 'pkg

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 06:47:01PM -0500, Glen Barber wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 03:44:11PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 06:29:17PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote: In article 20131221230448.ga61...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu, Steve Kargl writes: Other than

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 03:44:11PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 06:29:17PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote: In article 20131221230448.ga61...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu, Steve Kargl writes: Other than the noise in /var/log/message, what does this provide that 'pkg

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 03:49:26PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: /var/log/message never gets corrupted? If a machine is compromised, I can review log from remote syslog server. It is impossible to trust the package information, relying on the local database alone. Glen pgpklyEF3RMKl.pgp

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

In article 20131221230448.ga61...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu, Steve Kargl writes: Other than the noise in /var/log/message, what does this provide that 'pkg info' doesn't! A record of when packages were installed and removed. -GAWollman ___

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

I was surprised initially, but haven't thought about it much since. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/PACKAGESITE-spam-tp5870583p5870666.html Sent from the freebsd-current mailing list archive at Nabble.com

Re: PACKAGESITE spam

On 22/12/2013 09:34, Steve Kargl wrote: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 11:14:39PM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: this has been done and activated for reason, first for lot of companies, companies can turn it on it they want it. Generally the more secure option is default, you can turn off

Re: [SPAM]Re: Latest -CURRENT/i386 could not start under VirutalBox 4.1.18 and 4.2 (Windows host): hangs up after atrtc0 detection

W dniu 2012-10-04 20:51, Lev Serebryakov pisze: Hello, Marek. You wrote 3 октября 2012 г., 23:17:35: atrtc0: AT realtime clock port 0x70-0x71 on acpi0 MS still the same in my environment, running FreeBSD 9.1 under ESXi5.1 host MS Do you have any solution? In my case it was local patch for

Re: [SPAM]Re: Latest -CURRENT/i386 could not start under VirutalBox 4.1.18 and 4.2 (Windows host): hangs up after atrtc0 detection

On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 22:24 +0200, Marek Salwerowicz wrote: W dniu 2012-10-04 20:51, Lev Serebryakov pisze: Hello, Marek. You wrote 3 октября 2012 г., 23:17:35: atrtc0: AT realtime clock port 0x70-0x71 on acpi0 MS still the same in my environment, running FreeBSD 9.1 under ESXi5.1 host

Re: [maybe spam] Re: running old binaries on -current

On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 13:56:11 -0800 Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote: On 12/4/11 12:30 PM, Yamagi Burmeister wrote: On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 22:25:19 +0200 Kostik Belousovkostik...@gmail.com wrote: Try to set sysctl security.bsd.map_at_zero to 1. I didn't even think of that. It

Re: Console Spam: acpi_tz0: _TMP value is absurd, ignored (-73.0C) [solved]

this spam? Ask on acpi@ list. Kidding :-) or not. Try hw.acpi.thermal.polling_rate=0. Adding the following line in /boot/loader.conf will disable acpi_thermal(4) completely: debug.acpi.disabled=thermal Jung-uk Kim Aye, both are my huckleberry. Thanks! Sean

Console Spam: acpi_tz0: _TMP value is absurd, ignored (-73.0C)

I have a Shuttle based intel box that appears to have some pretty bad ACPI implementation. Is there a good way to quiesce this spam? The console fills up with repeated warnings that never cease. FreeBSD testbox 10.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0 r228164S: Wed Nov 30 16:19:16 PST 2011 sbruno

Re: Console Spam: acpi_tz0: _TMP value is absurd, ignored (-73.0C)

on 01/12/2011 01:22 Sean Bruno said the following: I have a Shuttle based intel box that appears to have some pretty bad ACPI implementation. Is there a good way to quiesce this spam? Ask on acpi@ list. Kidding :-) or not. Try hw.acpi.thermal.polling_rate=0. The console fills up

Re: Console Spam: acpi_tz0: _TMP value is absurd, ignored (-73.0C)

On Wednesday 30 November 2011 06:40 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote: on 01/12/2011 01:22 Sean Bruno said the following: I have a Shuttle based intel box that appears to have some pretty bad ACPI implementation. Is there a good way to quiesce this spam? Ask on acpi@ list. Kidding :-) or not. Try

(CTRL-C to abort) console spam

Hi all, The '(CTRL-C to abort)' which gets printed while dumping is irritating me because EC2's console has a very limited buffer and having this spammed makes it impossible to see any printfs immediately prior. (Turning off dumping solves the problem, but creates a worse problem, namely a lack

Re: (CTRL-C to abort) console spam

Hi all, On 12/28/10 07:37, Colin Percival wrote: The '(CTRL-C to abort)' which gets printed while dumping is irritating me because EC2's console has a very limited buffer and having this spammed makes it impossible to see any printfs immediately prior. Never mind, I've had pointed out to me

Re: [SPAM] freebsd-current Digest, Vol 367, Issue 6

--Best Regards,Littlecho This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content and is believed to be clean. Original Message From: freebsd-current-requ...@freebsd.org To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sent: Thu, Oct 28, 2010, 20:01 PM Subject: [SPAM] freebsd-current Digest

[SPAM] Re: Error message while updating src for FreeBSD 9 current

On 2010-09-23 13:21, Ralph Ellis wrote: Niclas Zeising wrote: On 2010-09-23 04:29, Ralph Ellis wrote: Hi, I recently upgraded my FreeBSD 8.1 installation to FreeBSD 9 current via buildworld and buildkernel. I was able to one general ports, src and doc update by cvsup but now I am getting the

Re: [SPAM] Re: Error message while updating src for FreeBSD 9 current

On 2010-09-23 13:36, Niclas Zeising wrote: On 2010-09-23 13:21, Ralph Ellis wrote: Niclas Zeising wrote: On 2010-09-23 04:29, Ralph Ellis wrote: Hi, I recently upgraded my FreeBSD 8.1 installation to FreeBSD 9 current via buildworld and buildkernel. I was able to one general ports, src and

[SPAM] Re: Error message while updating src for FreeBSD 9 current

On 2010-09-23 14:02, Bartosz Stec wrote: On 2010-09-23 13:36, Niclas Zeising wrote: On 2010-09-23 13:21, Ralph Ellis wrote: Niclas Zeising wrote: On 2010-09-23 04:29, Ralph Ellis wrote: Hi, I recently upgraded my FreeBSD 8.1 installation to FreeBSD 9 current via buildworld and buildkernel. I

Re: [SPAM] Re: Error message while updating src for FreeBSD 9 current

Niclas Zeising wrote: On 2010-09-23 14:02, Bartosz Stec wrote: On 2010-09-23 13:36, Niclas Zeising wrote: On 2010-09-23 13:21, Ralph Ellis wrote: Niclas Zeising wrote: On 2010-09-23 04:29, Ralph Ellis wrote: Hi, I recently upgraded my FreeBSD 8.1 installation to FreeBSD 9 current via

[SPAM] Re: Official request: Please make GNU grep the default

On 2010-08-20 11:10, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: If you have profiling libraries installed, you can build a profiling version of grep (or any program) like so: % cd /usr/src/usr.bin/grep % make clean % make DEBUG_FLAGS=-pg -g -DNO_SHARED Do *not make install, because the result will be dog

Re: Regarding recent spam on the list

From: Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Tue, 2003-08-19 at 18:03, Bill Moran wrote: Just curious if anyone knows the origin of all these auto-responses, etc. I'm seeing a lot of these on every list I'm subscribed to (not all of them FreeBSD related) so I was wondering if some

  1   2   >