Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
If you want to get tpconfig to work (so that you can customise various
features of the touchpad), I have a PR that will allow you to do this.
It is a combination of a hack to the kernel, and a port of tpconfig.
Look at
On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 16:54, Guido Van Hoecke wrote:
The windoze driver offers a set of extra features which I found useful
and which I would appreciate on a FreeBSD box:
- configurable touch behaviour
- edge motion
- scrolling
- button actions (including virtual btns supplied by the 4
Hello,
The i386 port uses the generic disklabel code, which has 32 bit logical
block addressing, which means that the partitions themselves are limited
to 1TB or so.
Will this change or GEOM will be the standard method? (and thanks, I
forgot that all of this is on IA-32)
But one could
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Attila Na
gy writes:
Hello,
The i386 port uses the generic disklabel code, which has 32 bit logical
block addressing, which means that the partitions themselves are limited
to 1TB or so.
Will this change or GEOM will be the standard method? (and thanks, I
forgot
Sorry for the late reply (I don't skim through the hackers
list very often).
Paul Schenkeveld [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For many applications however, for example lpd, named, sendmail,
tac_plus and others, it would be more than good enough to run that
program as a normal, non-root user
Hi!
Just want to let your know I can send some patches to be committed
to -current. Anyone interested? I'am asking because I tried
to communicate with some FreeBSD people this week, but their
did't respond for unknown reason (busy?).
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Serguei Tzukanov writes:
Hi!
Just want to let your know I can send some patches to be committed
to -current. Anyone interested? I'am asking because I tried
to communicate with some FreeBSD people this week, but their
did't respond for unknown reason (busy?).
Hey
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 08:07:27PM +0200, Hellmuth Michaelis wrote:
Exactly the same thing happened here with a IC35L020AVER07-0; it did not
do tagging and i bought it (and many other IBM drives) because of that.
[snip]
It turned out that the drive i bought had DELL firmware in it [ :- ]
Runlevels and opcodes
I am a bit familiar with the design of operating systems
but i definitely lack practical experience so please
apologize if i am confusing things ... Anyway i think
the subject is likely to interest our readers !
On most modern operating systems, system calls provide
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-09-23 13:08:04 -0400:
The odd behavior of variables is only one item from a whole list of them.
Go take a look at what use: means, if you want a headache.
you mean .USE? looks quite powerful... a can of worms if misused. :)
Or, how about the behavior of
On Fri, Sep 13, 2002 at 09:01:45AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote the words in effect of:
Terry Lambert wrote:
Jev wrote:
Im trying to build some software on freebsd, which wants to use
the thread safe gethostbyname_r(). Despite having very bad C skills im
going to attempt to patch it.
On a machine with either 4.6.2 of RELENG_4 as of today with:
3x wiX: Intersil Prism2.5 mem 0xfedf8000-0xfedf8fff irq 11 at device 19.X on
pci0
wiX: 802.11 address: 00:06:25:a7:a7:2a
wiX: using RF:PRISM2.5 MAC:ISL3874A(Mini-PCI)
wiX: Intersil Firmware: Primary
U, named currently does work within a jail ... I run several at the
moment ...
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Martin Matuska wrote:
I would like to ask which aspects has this patch on security of a jailed
environment.
This patch enables the use of named or ircd in jails.
--- in_pcb.c.old
I've been experiencing somewhat periodic panics on my 4.5-STABLE box:
[root@wickerpark crash] # uname -a
FreeBSD wickerpark.cnt.org 4.5-STABLE FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE #0: Thu Aug 29
12:26:05 CDT 2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/WP-DEBUG i386
kgdb output follows:
This GDB was
On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 11:47, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*** But what does prevent a user-level process from executing
wild instructions (RESET, traps, other dangerous instructions
and undocumented features) ?
I'm probably less knowledgeable then you are but in protected-mode
programming isn't
On 27 Sep 2002, Ryan Sommers wrote:
*** But what does prevent a user-level process from executing
wild instructions (RESET, traps, other dangerous instructions
and undocumented features) ?
I'm probably less knowledgeable then you are but in protected-mode
programming isn't the kernel
16 matches
Mail list logo