On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 11:43 PM -0800 2/4/03, Doug Barton wrote:
> >On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> >
> > > At 10:36 PM -0800 2/3/03, Doug Barton wrote:
> > > There's a section of mergemaster that starts out with the comment
> >> "Do an absolute diff fi
At 11:43 PM -0800 2/4/03, Doug Barton wrote:
On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 10:36 PM -0800 2/3/03, Doug Barton wrote:
> There's a section of mergemaster that starts out with the comment
"Do an absolute diff first to see if the files are actually different".
That's an opti
On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 10:36 PM -0800 2/3/03, Doug Barton wrote:
> >On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> > > I added:
> >> -I '$FreeBSD:.*$'
> > > to the 'diff ${DIFF_FLAG}' command in diff_loop, and it seems to
> > > have worked the way I wanted it
Thus spake Garance A Drosihn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I agree that random offsets will not buy much in the way of
> security, but it might make some kinds of initialization errors
> more obvious. I'm thinking of the kind of errors where a routine
> forgets to initialize a key variable, but everythin
At 2:10 PM -0600 2/4/03, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 11:51:14AM -0800, Justin Lundy wrote:
> Has similar work been done in FreeBSD been done? This would be
> a nice feature in 5.0-CURRENT. We had SecureBSD, and the IBM
> port of propolice, but both projects appear to be
Justin Lundy wrote:
> "Add a possibility to add a random offset to the stack on exec. This makes
> it slightly harder to write generic buffer overflows. This doesn't really
> give any real security, but it raises the bar for script-kiddies and it's
> really cheap.
It's also security through obscur
On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 11:51:14AM -0800, Justin Lundy wrote:
> Has similar work been done in FreeBSD been done? This would be a nice
> feature in 5.0-CURRENT. We had SecureBSD, and the IBM port of propolice,
> but both projects appear to be defunct at present. If we can integrate
> MAC into the ke
On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 07:25, Narvi wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Kurt J. Lidl wrote:
[snip]
> > How else are you going to do the physical interrupt steering?
> > Unless they have gone through the effort of implementing a whole
> > new and different steering mechanism -- which would fly in the face
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Kurt J. Lidl wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 11:21:49AM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> > :On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 10:17:23AM +0100, Mats Larsson wrote:
> > :> Via just recently announced their new Nehemiah processor capable of smp,
> > :> presumably slow as its precursor but
Justin Lundy wrote:
"Add a possibility to add a random offset to the stack on exec. This makes
it slightly harder to write generic buffer overflows. This doesn't really
give any real security, but it raises the bar for script-kiddies and it's
really cheap.
This idea can also be used within app
Has similar work been done in FreeBSD been done? This would be a nice
feature in 5.0-CURRENT. We had SecureBSD, and the IBM port of propolice,
but both projects appear to be defunct at present. If we can integrate
MAC into the kernel, why not port over OpenBSD's rebasing implementation
from /src/s
You have to understand that some of these people know a ton of unix because
for as long as I have been alive they have been working, hacking on Unix.
The reason questions like yours are generally not welcome in this crowd, is
because you are asking them to boil down the last 25 years of their caree
On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Doug Barton wrote:
[snip]
DB> > -I '$FreeBSD:.*$'
DB> > to the 'diff ${DIFF_FLAG}' command in diff_loop, and it seems to have
DB> > worked the way I wanted it to work.
DB>
DB> What do you think mm should do if the only diff between two files is the
DB> cvs ID? This com
Sean Davis wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 10:00:48PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > This is actually incorrect. At one point in time, the email
> > address of the driver authors was printed out in boot messsages,
> > under Linux. They had a "flag day" in which Linus removed all
> > the printf
Nat Lanza wrote:
On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 18:06, Terry Lambert wrote:
But if that's the argument for removing it, then it's probably
time to remove the ability to use non-DMA IDE drives from the
ATA driver, and kill all the ethernet drivers that have alignment
requirements for their DMA engines,
Is there a place where these *nix questions
can be asked? Where I can ask why like how
BSD like is the new MAC-OS? Like in the
MAC OS boot-up what part is handled by
BSD. If someone says my MAC hangs with
the "Happy Mac" can I go down to the # prompt
and start poking around and see what is wrong.
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 10:00:48PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
This is actually incorrect. At one point in time, the email
> address of the driver authors was printed out in boot messsages,
> under Linux. They had a "flag day" in which Linus removed all
> the printf's. This flag day was actuall
Garance A Drosihn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I happen to be updating my system tonight, so when it came to the
> mergemaster step I first modified the script. I added:
> -I '$FreeBSD:.*$'
> to the 'diff ${DIFF_FLAG}' command in diff_loop, and it seems to have
> worked the way I wanted it to w
Garance A Drosihn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I happen to be updating my system tonight, so when it came to the
> mergemaster step I first modified the script. I added:
> -I '$FreeBSD:.*$'
> to the 'diff ${DIFF_FLAG}' command in diff_loop, and it seems to have
> worked the way I wanted it to w
On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
> rmkml wrote:
> > Thank for you answer.
>
> Sorry that it probably was not the answer you wanted. 8-(.
>
>
> > It is difficult to find anything concerning the signal model
> > of BSD implementation. In particular, for threaded applications.
> > If you
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 11:39:47PM -0500, Munish Chopra wrote:
> On 2003-02-03 18:51 +, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> > >The classic Unix including BSD4.4 UNIX is now under a
> > >BSD-like license too (finding it is another issue
> > >though ;).
> >
> > Kirk McKusick sells a CD-ROM collection cont
Hello,
I have a very silly (because real hardware isn't yet ready) question to
x86-64 support.
According to the docs, the first implementation of x86-64 will use PAE to
map 48 bit address space to 40 bit, which is 128 GB.
Will FreeBSD support that 40 bit addressing or it will be similar to the
al
rmkml wrote:
> Thank for you answer.
Sorry that it probably was not the answer you wanted. 8-(.
> It is difficult to find anything concerning the signal model
> of BSD implementation. In particular, for threaded applications.
> If you can give me some advise or documentation to read, it will
>
Thank for you answer.
It is difficult to find anything concerning the signal model
of BSD implementation. In particular, for threaded applications.
If you can give me some advise or documentation to read, it will
be very helpfull to me .
In the first part of the answer, do you want to say that a
On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 10:48:40AM +0100, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
+> There is commit bit for Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Grr:) s/is/ISN'T/
--
Pawel Jakub Dawidek
UNIX Systems Administrator
http://garage.freebsd.pl
Am I Evil? Yes, I Am.
msg39615/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP si
>Submitter-Id: current-users
>Originator:Pawel Jakub Dawidek
>Organization:
>Confidential: no
>Synopsis: Missing commit bit [PATCH].
>Severity: critical
>Priority: high
>Category: misc
>Class: change-request
>Release: All of them.
>Environment:
Any.
>Desc
der Mouse wrote:
> [off-list]
Uh, no it wasn't. Do you want a reply? On list or off?
8-).
-- Terry
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
> To: Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [off-list]
Ugh. My apologies to everyone involved.
I'll go crawl back in my hole now
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ /
28 matches
Mail list logo
