On Thu, 5 Apr 2007, Alvaro Mantilla Gimenez wrote:
After install samba from ports (samba-3.0.21bp4) i can see in the swat(8) man
page:
In /etc/inetd.conf you should add a line like this:
swat stream tcp nowait.400 root /usr/local/samba/sbin/swat swat
But swat binary is, actually, on
poking archives, i have the impression that ami(4) family has the best
chance of being the card with the greatest degree of userland
visibility, but wanted to check if that's the case.
need a low-profile ATA (parallel) controller who can take
four drives.
it'd be cool if it does
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 11:38:51PM -0400, Trash Compactor wrote:
And since the greylisted entry doesn't see anymore activity, after
the 4 hours elapse, it just quietly bows out and exits... stage-left
even!
/Jason
spamd used to reaper any outstanding GREYs when an IP ascended
to
This is not so much a response to you Steven, as to the entire OpenBSD
community.
quoth the Steven Harms:
There are two roads, the high and the low road. I am not sure why an adult
(assuming) needs to be educated on this.
High road? Is that how you would describe Theo's handling of this
On 4/6/07, Douglas Allan Tutty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 06:52:25PM +0200, Karl Sjvdahl - dunceor wrote:
On 4/5/07, RedShift [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've got this linksys SRW2016 managed 16 port gigabit switch at home.
The only problem with it, is that the firmware
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 08:13:39PM -0400, Gordon Willem Klok wrote:
Software is developed by PEOPLE (plural), people dont work very well
together when one of them is acting like a five year old.
gwk
Isn't everybody in this discussion like a five year old?
If you look at the thread it makes
Diana is right. Newer switches uses ASICs (Application Specific
Integrated Circuits) to do the switching. Making the MAC Address
lookup table basically hardwired into the hardware. That is why
switches are basically wire speed unlike a software bridge which is
slow in comparison.
Glenn, I
Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
On 4/5/07, Steve Shockley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Siju George wrote:
I wish somebody would design a simple hardware that has 24 or more NIC
ports ( and of course WiFi ) and processor than can install OpenBSD.
With PF then I could have a very inexpensive managed switch
Hello OpenBSD community.
Is there anyone using EJBCA on OpenBSD?
If thats the case:
Problems?
Installation?
Good or Bad?
Any other CA software working better on OpenBSD?
//AJ
RedShift wrote:
Hello all,
I've got this linksys SRW2016 managed 16 port gigabit switch at home.
The only problem with it, is that the firmware well eh, sucks. The
telnet interface can't configure everything (just basic setup, you can't
even set up SNMP or VLANs) and the webinterface only
On 4/6/07 1:26 AM, Andris Delfino wrote:
First, this wouldn't happen cause I prefer the BSD license, but, if
someone violates the copyright of my work, I'll take that guy down. In
the most publicly and shameful way.
A) If you really prefer BSD you wouldn't care about what people do
with your
On 4/5/07, Dag Richards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matiss Miglans wrote:
Hi good people !
I need to make connection from server witch is in LAN1 to server witch
is in LAN3.
And I need to make another connection from that same server witch is in
LAN3 to that same server witch is in LAN1.
Let us know if you get this working. I would love to run OpenBSD on
my switches. PF running at wire speed would be beyond awesome.
rc
On 4/6/07, RedShift [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
On 4/5/07, Steve Shockley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Siju George wrote:
I wish somebody
On Fri, 6 Apr 2007, darren kirby wrote:
This is not so much a response to you Steven, as to the entire OpenBSD
community.
Ok, as I feel part of it, I will respond to this.
High road? Is that how you would describe Theo's handling of this situation?
Theo reacted _to_ the handling of the
I'd saw that everyone had running openbsd on a hp procurve 5300xl
switch on this modul here.
http://www.hp.com/rnd/accessories/J8162A_/accessory.htm
but i don't know some details. it would be very interesting.
Thomas
On Friday, 6. April 2007 09:14, you wrote:
Diana is right. Newer switches
I'm running snort on OpenBSD 4.0 amd64. I've tried 2.4.5 among the
packages, and built 2.6.1.4 from the source (are there any special
configure options I should use?). Also I've tried many combinations of
rules: registered user, community and bleeding-edge rules. The same
result.
For example,
Would it be wrong to develop software using existing GPL'ed code as a
starting point.
And bit by bit rewrite the code until you have rewritten all of it.
Then releasing the final code under an BSD license?
*shrug* Personally I consider that a derivative work and try to avoid
it, though
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 09:36:22AM +0600, Artyom Goryainov wrote:
Hi, all! How can I painlessly upgrade OpenBSD 3.1 to 4.0 without
reinstalling all system and soft?
You can't. Far too much changed in between; it's a better idea to just
reinstall, upgrading no less than nine times just isn't a
On 2007/04/06 10:26, RedShift wrote:
RedShift wrote:
I've got this linksys SRW2016 managed 16 port gigabit switch at home.
The only problem with it, is that the firmware well eh, sucks. The
telnet interface can't configure everything (just basic setup, you can't
even set up SNMP or VLANs)
On Thu, 5 Apr 2007, Andris Delfino wrote:
First, this wouldn't happen cause I prefer the BSD license, but, if
someone violates the copyright of my work, I'll take that guy down. In
the most publicly and shameful way.
How does this militant attitude work alongside your preference for
the BSD
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 02:54:03AM -0600, rc wrote:
Let us know if you get this working. I would love to run OpenBSD on
my switches. PF running at wire speed would be beyond awesome.
Oh please. A managed switch is not even closely able to run PF especially
those cheapo Linksys thingis with
On 2007/04/06 00:27, darren kirby wrote:
Oh no? Read the thread again:
I think it would have been fairer if you included Marcus' response
for the benefit of people who just read your selected quotes rather
than the whole thread.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/1573
On 4/6/07, Sam Fourman Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/5/07, Steve Shockley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Siju George wrote:
I wish somebody would design a simple hardware that has 24 or more NIC
ports ( and of course WiFi ) and processor than can install OpenBSD.
With PF then I could have a
Hello,
Trying to load any rules ( even /usr/share/pf/ examples ) I get the error
about enabling table loading for optimizations
and rules get ignored. anybody able to gently apply a cluestick as to what
table loading it is talking about?
# uname -a
OpenBSD gooner.mynet.net 4.1 GENERIC#10 i386
#
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 10:56:11AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd saw that everyone had running openbsd on a hp procurve 5300xl
switch on this modul here.
http://www.hp.com/rnd/accessories/J8162A_/accessory.htm
but i don't know some details. it would be very interesting.
My company is
Claudio Jeker wrote:
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 02:54:03AM -0600, rc wrote:
Let us know if you get this working. I would love to run OpenBSD on
my switches. PF running at wire speed would be beyond awesome.
Oh please. A managed switch is not even closely able to run PF especially
those cheapo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6-apr-2007, at 10:32, chefren wrote:
On 4/6/07 1:26 AM, Andris Delfino wrote:
First, this wouldn't happen cause I prefer the BSD license, but, if
someone violates the copyright of my work, I'll take that guy
down. In
the most publicly and
On 2007/04/06 12:04, mark reardon wrote:
# pfctl -Rf /etc/pf.conf
pfctl: Must enable table loading for optimizations
the ruleset optimizer is now turned on by default; either don't
use -R, or do use -onone
Hi,
Now everyone has won, the Linux people, Broadcom and the OpenBSD users.
Thank you, Linux BCW developers!
actually, although the above is clearly meant in the sense if irony.
I take it literally and agree with it.
didn't cry a single tear about the adaptec shit either.
my laptop has some
* Floor Terra [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-04-06 01:43]:
Would it be wrong to develop software using existing GPL'ed code as a
starting point.
And bit by bit rewrite the code until you have rewritten all of it.
Then releasing the final code under an BSD license?
100% legal
--
Henning Brauer,
Hi all,
I have compiled a custom kernel based on GENERIC, enabled one line:
ral* on pci?, and the card is recognized and seems to see other
networks as well (ifconfig -M ral0). I'll start measuring transfer
rates soon.
As promised, I've managed to measure the transfer rates, using my
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6-apr-2007, at 15:45, Darren Reed wrote:
You write on misc@openbsd.org:
Would it be wrong to develop software using existing GPL'ed code as
a starting point. And bit by bit rewrite the code until you
have rewritten all of it. Then releasing
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 21:29:52 +0200, Marc Balmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Diana Eichert wrote:
bcw(4) is gone
Marcus Glocker, [EMAIL PROTECTED], knows a big deal about wireless
LANs. He has been involved in many of our wirelesss driver, he has also
written applications for wireless
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 17:25:53 -0400, Daniel Ouellet
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Where is the Open Community is going these days...
They stated that they don't want Broadcom to take their work and close
it. Why do they care? What possible difference does it make?
Broadcom will get a driver that
IMO this is a vindication of the principle that being a jerk doesn't
necessarily make you wrong: Michael should have handled this differently
(especially given the state of the driver at the time), but he does have
a responsibility to protect his license. It seems to be a big concern to
him
On 4/6/07, Marco Peereboom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What you people seem to miss in the whole discussion here is that Linux
people contact vendors IN PRIVATE if they find GPL violations yet a
valuable member of the open source community does not get the same
courtesy. Only bad things happen
On Fri, 2007-04-06 at 10:22 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They stated that they don't want Broadcom to take their work and close
it. Why do they care? What possible difference does it make?
Broadcom will get a driver that actually works well?
What do you care if that's what they care about?
Upon booting, I have always seen APM connect errors, but assumed that this
was because I had never configured it. After looking at the manpages for
APM(4) APM(8) on OpenBSD 4.0, it looked like all I needed to do is enable
apmd through /etc/rc.conf. I wasn't seeing any entry in dmesg before
On Fri, 06 Apr 2007 11:15:33 -0400, Harry Menegay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 21:29:52 +0200, Marc Balmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Diana Eichert wrote:
To ease his work, and to let others in our group to step in in his
efforts, he committet it to
Hello,
I maybe barking up the wrong tree on this one. I am trying to
push ftp clients thru a internal bridged interface with no dice.
I can say that I have several firewalls w/ftp clients of all flavours working
fine thru IPv4 connected interfaces. However is there a way to
get it to work when
I read the whole thread at gmane and I'm disgusted that a Linux
developer would turn on a BSD developer like that, but I'm not
surprised.
Theo makes the point that Buesch and Co. are treating Marcus like a
thief. They all deny it (claiming they want to help Marcus and the
situation), but then
Writes darren kirby [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
...
From: Joseph Jezak:
As one of the reverse engineers, the reason for the openness of
writing the specification was to ensure that the Chinese Wall method
was maintained.
To date, I have not been contacted by any of the bcw programmers
regarding
On 4/6/07, Marcus Watts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a shame the gnu folks didn't release their reversed engineered
specifications separately.
Waitaminit - I thought they did?!?! Reading that gmane list, one of
the spec writing people said he would be happy to answer any questions
about the
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 12:31:43PM -0400, Bret Lambert wrote:
On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 22:11 -0600, dreamwvr wrote:
Hello,
I maybe barking up the wrong tree on this one. I am trying to
push ftp clients thru a internal bridged interface with no dice.
I can say that I have several firewalls
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 01:30:35PM -0400, bofh wrote:
On 4/6/07, Marcus Watts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a shame the gnu folks didn't release their reversed engineered
specifications separately.
Waitaminit - I thought they did?!?!
Yes they did: http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/
I've spent
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 11:50:15AM -0400, Marcus Watts wrote:
It's a shame the gnu folks didn't release their reversed engineered
specifications separately.
They did: http://bcm-specs.sipsolutions.net and
http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net.
bofh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 4/6/07, Marcus Watts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a shame the gnu folks didn't release their reversed engineered
specifications separately.
Waitaminit - I thought they did?!?! Reading that gmane list, one of
the spec writing people said he would be
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 11:50:15AM -0400, Marcus Watts wrote:
Writes darren kirby [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
...
From: Joseph Jezak:
As one of the reverse engineers, the reason for the openness of
writing the specification was to ensure that the Chinese Wall method
was maintained.
To date, I
Gordon Willem Klok [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Part of this is nonsense and I dont mean to pick on you in particular
but I have seen it repeated a few times now and its getting annoying.
If licenses were as viral as some of you people imagine that one cannot
look at a source file copyrighted
On 4/6/07, Marcus Watts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the really valuable lesson out of all this is that this shows,
for once for all, that a GPL licensed driver is *not* an acceptable
substitute for proper documentation released by the maker without undo
intellectual or financial burden
Hello,
I've been using 4.1 with X11 without problems (using a simple custom xorg.conf
with the i810 driver).
I updated to current with the latest xenocara a few minutes ago but now, I'm
not able to use the i810 driver, because I get the following error when
starting X:
(WW) I810: No matching
On Apr 6, 2007, at 2:42 PM, Darren Spruell wrote:
This whole affair has once again proved that the project's dedication
to getting a hardware vendor to reduce completely open specifications
and documentation, and not compromises around such, is truly the only
safe way to go.
That appears to
On 4/6/07, Didier Wiroth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been using 4.1 with X11 without problems (using a simple custom xorg.conf
with the i810 driver).
I updated to current with the latest xenocara a few minutes ago but now, I'm
not able to use the i810 driver, because I get the following
On 2007/04/06 22:44, Didier Wiroth wrote:
I've been using 4.1 with X11 without problems (using a simple custom
xorg.conf with the i810 driver).
I think you got lucky and had a build from just after the old i810 driver
was imported (4 April), there was a problem with the newer intel driver.
Hello,
Thanks for helping!
This is a reasonably major update to X, you might like to start
with no
xorg.conf or a fresh one (disable X, run Xorg -configure) and
merge in
whatever you need.
I tried to use Xorg -configure but it doesn't find/use the i810 driver.
It generates a
Jon Steel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ive found a way to freeze a program when using rThreads and using a
You are using unsupported kernel options. You are on your own, unless you
talk directly to someone working on the code and work with them.
rthreads are in no way usable yet. You can run
Hi,
I'm configuring 2 server to use as a gateway for multihoming.
I use:
OpenBSD 4.0 stable and OpenBSD 4.0 release
OpenBGPD
OpenOSPFD
CARP for failover
I have 2 router with 3 interfaces and 5 carp interfaces by router.
interface1 = eBGP with 2 upstream provider
interface2 = Link between the
On 4/6/07, Stefan Sperling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes they did: http://bcm-v4.sipsolutions.net/
I've spent some time reading it today, for the occasion.
It seems to be lacking some details, e.g. the section describing
how to attach the backplane bridge of the chip [1] says to turn on the
58 matches
Mail list logo
