I'm not regularly reading hackers these days, but I was pointed to the
amazing FUD being spread here. Please keep me in the Cc: if you want
me to see your replies.
The fact that the CGD author(s) engage in this FUD spreading in
random mailing lists rather than contact me directly speaks speaks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The fact that the CGD author(s) engage in this FUD spreading in
random mailing lists rather than contact me directly speaks
speaks for itself, but here are my replies to some of the points raised:
Obviously this is a part of some aggressive NetBSD advocacy campaign
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], ALeine writes:
1. Introducing a sysctl variable to control how often (after how many writes)
the random key is regenerated:
kern.geom.bde.random_key_regeneration_cycle
The way it works now would correspond to the value being 1 with
regeneration happening on every
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], ALeine writes:
I find using a single key for the whole disk less secure and not
very practical when one wants to change the key because it takes
a very long time to re-encrypt the entire disk. However, having
a separate per-sector key which is changed on every write
Hello hackers,
Could you take a look at my PR which contains rc.d/ script for
attaching memory disks managed with mdconfig(8) on system
startup:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=conf/78257
Comments are welcome.
Best regards,
--
* Wojciech A. Koszek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello all,
I want to do some remote kernel debugging using GDB on FreeBSD 5.3.
I connected host and target with a null-modem cable on COM1 and made a debug
kernel with options GDB, options DDB, options KDB and makeoptions
DEBUG=-g and I set the port flags of sio0 to 0x80.
But if I start
Hi, I have a Q on generating kernel core dump when the system boots up..
my kernel crashes when it tries to mount the root device, /, i.e.,
before it adding the swap device to the system (so there is no swap
device when the system tries to generate core dump).. I am wondering is
there a way to
On 1109758470 seconds since the Beginning of the UNIX epoch
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
So how about it guys: Instead of spreading FUD, lets work together
and make the world an even better place ?
I am hoping that the discussion will yield infomation that will
allow each of us to improve our
Wouldn't a multi threaded program potentially need more cpu time than
vi? Multithreaded apps are created to do a lot of computation or
because they have a lot of concurrent activity that might block right?
On Mar 1, 2005, at 2:49 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
If you make 1000 threads, you get
--- Lucas Holt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wouldn't a multi threaded program potentially need
more cpu time than
vi?
No. That is not a given.
Multithreaded apps are created to do a lot of
computation or
because they have a lot of concurrent activity that
might block right?
Threads
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 11:48:14PM +0200, Cole wrote:
Hey.
I have a Freebsd server running freebsd-4.9-stable.
I cvsupped the ntop src last week for 3.1.1.
I then had no problems what so ever building ntop, except for the xml plugin
saying it was not built, cause it cannot find
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Matt wrote:
When providing a shell environment for a larger number of users, what is the
best way to retrict access to commands/resources? I've already setup quotas.
I don't want users playing with system commands. I've read something about a
retricted shell, but can't
Lucas Holt wrote:
Wouldn't a multi threaded program potentially need more cpu time than
vi? Multithreaded apps are created to do a lot of computation or
because they have a lot of concurrent activity that might block right?
Isn't that what nice is for?
if (only) two processes are using all the
Kamal R. Prasad wrote:
--- Lucas Holt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wouldn't a multi threaded program potentially need
more cpu time than
vi?
No. That is not a given.
Multithreaded apps are created to do a lot of
computation or
because they have a lot of concurrent activity that
might
Can someone review this? I think 'u' is incorrectly
added to instead of assigned to. This causes the initial
calculation to be garage based and screws up displaying
poll information.
I'd like this to be MFC'd before 5.4 if possible.
Index: syscalls.c
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Roland Dowdeswell wri
tes:
Let's discuss a simple example and see how it works. Let's walk
through a user login, with /etc/passwd on GBDE and the filesystem
mounted with mtime.
These days, on the majority of low cost disks used in enduser
configurations you risk
--- Julian Elischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kamal R. Prasad wrote:
--- Lucas Holt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wouldn't a multi threaded program potentially need
more cpu time than
vi?
No. That is not a given.
Multithreaded apps are created to do a lot of
17 matches
Mail list logo
