.
That output should allow you to narrow down which process is allocating
so much RAM.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/
wmo...@collaborativefusion.com
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
IMPORTANT
is this discussion on hack...@?
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail
In response to Peter Steele pste...@webmail.maxiscale.com:
Is it possible to determine the number of open files per process? We
want to monitor this via a separate process and issue an alarm if some
threshold is crossed.
The fstat command will do this for you.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative
because the original Sun spec for the API said so.
It makes little sense to change it just to unsigned. The additional 2G
it would give doesn't really solve the tuning problem on a 64G system.
This is simply a spec that has become outdated by modern hardware.
--
Bill Moran
http://www.potentialtech.com
OS (like FreeBSD) where ISNs are random, the possibility of
blindly spoofing an IP during a 3-way handshake is so low as to be
effectively impossible.
Yes, it _can_ be done, but the effort required makes it not an effective
method of attack.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
http
for this purpose?
If this belongs on -security let me know and I'll ask over there.
http://potentialtech.com/cms/node/16
--
Bill Moran
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe
they'll work on Gentoo and
OSX as well:
http://www.webmin.com/
http://www.cfengine.org/
http://reductivelabs.com/trac/puppet/
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
In response to Igor Mozolevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 24/02/2008, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Igor Mozolevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Fact is, data is sensitive to different degrees. It's also valuable
to different degrees.
If you're worried about your personal
it as a limitation of the hardware and tested different
hardware.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
Igor Mozolevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24/02/2008, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Igor Mozolevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23/02/2008, Brooks Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should actually read the paper. :) They successfully defeat both
Christopher Arnold [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2008, Bill Moran wrote:
Or laptop vendors could make secure laptops that always lose memory
on shutdown.
That dosn't really change anything, just don't shutdown the laptop.
It reduces the risk greatly when combined
of a roundabout that I don't know if it's worth it or not.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
on that box. They may even
have it rooted.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any
to the admin to step in and stop things
when a problem is detected, but at least you'd know. And those
programs are available on all systems now.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
___
freebsd-hackers
, but we've been using ipmitool from ports for
a while with success, and we're investigating FreeIPMI.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
PROTECTED]
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
IMPORTANT: This message contains confidential information
and is intended only for the individual named. If the reader
6.x on these systems, so YMMV.
Sorry for cross-posting, I was not sure which list was more adequate.
Probably [EMAIL PROTECTED] Although I would have started with -questions@
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Christoph P. Kukulies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
does FreeBSD provide the ability to run VMWARE-Player for Linux and
run VMs in it?
No. To the best of my knowledge it's not possible to run any VMWare
product under FreeBSD.
Qemu will run VMWare virtual machines under some conditions.
In response to Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Bill Moran wrote:
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/code/jailme.html
Feedback is appreciated.
Be very very careful. Both chroot(2) and jail(2) can only be called by
root, and for very good reasons. Unprivileged users can
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/code/jailme.html
Feedback is appreciated.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023
IMPORTANT: This message contains confidential
to each other.
Another option is SSL certificates.
Although, since you don't describe the goal you're trying to accomplish,
it's difficult to know if either of those will work for you.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
___
freebsd-hackers
In response to Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[I sent this to questions@ yesterday and have yet to get a response. I
suspect it may be a little more technical than [EMAIL PROTECTED]
uname -a
FreeBSD db00.lab00 6.2-BETA3 FreeBSD 6.2-BETA3 #1: Fri Dec 8 09:27:37 EST
2006 [EMAIL
[Kris -- are you interested in this or should I trim you from the CC?]
In response to Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, 2006-Dec-13 10:50:21 -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
sysctl kern.ipc.shmmax=22
kern.ipc.shmmax: 21
would like to allocate more than 2G for PostgreSQL
to use ...
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
How about using skipto instead of allow? Thus, if it passes the
first one, it can just skipto the next rule to be checked. i.e.:
ipfw add 11 skipto 12 tcp from any to me 25 setup limit dst-addr 32
ipfw add 12 allow tcp
seems to happen the most often
with bad media (i.e. disks/cds or bad disk/cd drive) I would check there
first.
--
Bill Moran
Potential Technologies
http://www.potentialtech.com
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo
Sometimes the stick of POLA should be broken.
Off topic, I know, but it's going to bother me.
What's POLA?
-Bill
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Does anyone have any explanation as to why this is coming through -hackers?
Peter Pflaum wrote:
I will be on this program Sunday at 10 - 11 AM on BBC - it is a webcast
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/talking_point/newsid_1444000/1444930.stm
BBC News TALKING POINT Globalisation
Are you saying that he didn't even send them?
Matthew Jacob wrote:
No. Peter Pflaum responded when I asked him with a Quoi???!?!?!?!
On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Bill Moran wrote:
Does anyone have any explanation as to why this is coming through -hackers?
Peter Pflaum wrote
Matthew Jacob wrote:
My guess, fwiw, is that somebody subscribed freebsd-hackers to some eGroup toy
and this is why this is happening. Joy.
I don't know. If it's coming from some eGroup, why is it originating at what
looks like a dialup address, and running through Earthling?
Looks like SPAM
Mike Smith wrote:
If anyone is taking a vote, I disagree. I do not want any system
ever assuming anything about my network. Even Win checks with the
user before enabling DHCP.
Er, you *are* kidding, right? All modern Windows versions will try to
get a lease long before the user has any
Wes Peters wrote:
Just because you don't see it doesn't make it a bad idea. Network admins
begged for years for a centralized IP address space management server;
now that they've been given one (that works, and is FREE) people like you
bitch about it and won't use it. Feh.
Are you saying
Wes Peters wrote:
Hmmm ... well, I was never upset with the crufty details ... I rather
like
to know what's going on under the hood all the time. Then again, that's
me. If you're targeting newbies and other less-educated (or less I sure
would like to figure this out inclined) people,
Joseph Mallett wrote:
Are you saying you use DHCP for servers? If so, maybe I should shut up
and
listen for a while because apparently there's something here I can
learn.
I did for a long time because I simply couldn't get a static IP from my
ISP. Hell, I'd love to use it now, then
David Scheidt wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Bill Moran wrote:
:Wes Peters wrote:
: Just because you don't see it doesn't make it a bad idea. Network admins
: begged for years for a centralized IP address space management server;
: now that they've been given one (that works, and is FREE
Has anyone else tried to contact the postmaster of this domain concerning
this? If not, I'm willing to (but I don't see any need to spam him with
100 messages)
-Bill
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|- Message log follows: ---|
| no valid recipients were
Terry Lambert wrote:
If you pick default installation or full installation, it
_should_ try to be smart; if you pick custom installation,
you chould have to babysit it like you do today.
In the default case, it should attempt to obtain a DHCP lease,
and, failing that, ask the user to give
Wes Peters wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
Wes Peters wrote:
Oh, come now. FreeBSD's disk partitioning has always sucked. It does suck
somewhat less than many Linux linstallers, and a lot less than the OpenBSD
installer, but it still shoves way too many details and options
Jordan Hubbard wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
These mechanisms existed before without BSDi, so there was no impact.
Actually, ftp downloads got a LOT slower after BSDi took over, so i consider
it a negative impact in that area.
SNIP Elvis metaphore
BSDi had no effect on
Terry Lambert wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
Now, I've never used partition magic, but I (personally)
find the FreeBSD partition program in sysinstall to be the
easiest one I've ever used. What should be changed to make
it easier?
1) Buy a new laptop
2) Make the Windows partition
Terry Lambert wrote:
If anyone is taking a vote, I disagree. I do not want any system
ever assuming anything about my network. Even Win checks with the
user before enabling DHCP.
FYI: The networking bootstrap process I described above
is derived from the process used by Windows 98 and
*sigh* this has gotten way off track somehow. Looking back, I'm
probably primarily to blame.
The fact is: *I* *AM* interested in replacing or helping out with
an effort to replace/improve sysinstall. However, there are two
critical things I must understand if I am to do anything truely
Terry Lambert wrote:
Historically, you've always held that the CDROM must boot
to sysinstall. As the software's daddy, I can see why
you'd want that; but your baby is ugly.
I don't see anyone stepping up to replace it any time
soon, so long as you insist that they not be able to
make
Terry Lambert wrote:
2 practical questions:
What *exactly* do you see wrong with sysinstall and what
*exactly* would you do to improve it.
I've been looking for various projects to work on, but
sysinstall has never looked (to me) like it needed any
serious work. Perhaps I'm looking
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Both the kernel and kernel.debug files are of exactly the same size -
about 3.3 Megs . This is inspite of having the DEBUG=-g option being set
in the MYKERNEL directory. Any other clues, why this could be happening.
I also tried the other procedure of using 'make
[You may get better responses if you send 2 seperate emails with one
question in each]
Len Conrad wrote:
ad1: 73308MB IBM-DTLA-307075 [148945/16/63] at ata0-slave UDMA100
If it's any help, I'm using that exact same drive currently and it's
sort of working. I'm having trouble with random panics
Len Conrad wrote:
[You may get better responses if you send 2 seperate emails with one
question in each]
I didn´t want to send TWO OT msgs :)))
Tradeoff. I almost didn't read the message because I was confused by the
subject line. Other's might complain if you sent two OT messages. Hmmm
Alex Zepeda wrote:
On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 10:43:44AM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
ad1: 73308MB IBM-DTLA-307075 [148945/16/63] at ata0-slave UDMA100
If it's any help, I'm using that exact same drive currently and it's
sort of working. I'm having trouble with random panics on this system
Hello all,
I've been trying to resolve this for a few weeks now. Previous posts to
-questions have produced no useful info, and I haven't found anything in
the list archives that has helped.
This machine is running 4.3-STABLE cvsupped from May 21. I have
experienced the exact same problem with
Alexander Langer wrote:
Thus spake Bill Moran ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
So ... I'm looking for any possible help in straightening this out.
Advice on how to run gdb more effectively is welcome, as well as anyone
Hi!
In the handbook there is a chapter about how to debug kernels.
If you
Robert Watson wrote:
On Sun, 15 Apr 2001, Julian Elischer wrote:
http://www.microsoft.com/backstage/column_T2_1.htm
this gives a blank screen... maybe they removed it.
I found I had some netscape interop problems. Trying hitting reload a
couple of times.
If you're using
I'm working on a quick little programming project for a client and ran
across this in the man page for access(2)
"Access() is a potential security hole and should never be used."
Obviously, I could use stat() instead, but use of access() will make
this project so simple it's not even funny.
Rick Bradley wrote:
* Bill Moran ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010331 10:48]:
[...]
Does anyone have a pointer to more detailed information on the potential
security hole in access()? I've got a bit more research to do on this,
but I'd appreciate any pointers to speed me along.
I'd say
in the man page. The
current message is a little harsher than needed (I think)
-Bill
Robert Watson wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2001, Paul Herman wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2001, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bill Moran writes:
: I'm a little confused here, if access
Greg Black wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
| Thanks for the additional explanation. It has done a number of things
| for me, one of which is convince me that (for my application) the use of
| access() is not a security problem.
You're almost certainly wrong in that conclusion; and even
Mike Smith wrote:
This is actually an interesting case.
I have some interesting clients. The reality of the matter is that their
filesystem organization on the server is terrible. This could all be
solved with a properly reorganized directory hierarchy - and that was my
first suggestion when
56 matches
Mail list logo
