On Sat, 21 Apr 2007, Han Boetes wrote:
> Default User wrote:
> > is a root account really necessary?
>
> No.
>
>
> > wouldn't a system with no root account, where all maintenance is
> > done as sudo, be more secure?
>
> No. It all depends on what you want and what your situation is.
>
>
> >
Daniel Ouellet wrote:
Henning Brauer wrote:
* Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 14:49]:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:36:29PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 00:36]:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 10:51:56PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> is a root account really necessary? wouldn't a system with no root
> account, where all maintenance is done as sudo, be more secure? if so,
> why not install with no root account by default?
Buy a book on Unix, please.
Default User wrote:
> is a root account really necessary?
well, the account is needed for many tasks.
I presume you mean to ask, "Is it necessary to be able to directly log
into the root account?", and that answer, in OpenBSD, is no. However
the account must exist so that many applications can r
J.C. Roberts wrote:
> On Friday 20 April 2007 08:32, Tony Abernethy wrote:
>> Jason Beaudoin wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > > Use all the tricks you can for YOUR solution, including:
>> > > * lots of "small" partitions
>> >
>> > What are the reasonings behind this?
>> >
>> > Thanks for the awesome post!
Default User wrote:
> is a root account really necessary?
No.
> wouldn't a system with no root account, where all maintenance is
> done as sudo, be more secure?
No. It all depends on what you want and what your situation is.
> if so, why not install with no root account by default?
It isn't
On 4/20/07, David Cary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have been a user of OpenBSD for a number of years (4 I think) and usually
manage to solve my problems alone however I am having trouble getting my
audio to work on this computer.
$ mixerctl -a | grep master
outputs.master=207,207
outputs.master
is a root account really necessary? wouldn't a system with no root
account, where all maintenance is done as sudo, be more secure? if so,
why not install with no root account by default?
Damon McMahon wrote:
This all makes sense now, and you are indeed correct. The garbage
input is being sent from my console device to the OpenBSD machine when
the console device boots (booting Windows 2K in this case). The reason
for the 1 in 25 or so frequency is because this event only occurs w
David Cary wrote:
tried to create audio1 but did not get it right so moved audio0 to audio1
and replaced the symlink between audio and audio0 with one between audio and
audio1.
I think "/dev/MAKEDEV audio1" will create all four sound devices. After
that try unmuting all outputs and volumes wi
Allie D. wrote:
YES ! It's on it's way !!
> BSD41.0020
I suppose that means you were the 20th to order...
I have been a user of OpenBSD for a number of years (4 I think) and usually
manage to solve my problems alone however I am having trouble getting my
audio to work on this computer.
$ mixerctl -a | grep master
outputs.master=207,207
outputs.master.mute=off
This is the relevant output of dmesg:
aut
Hi,
I installed waveplay from ports on OpenBSD 4.1 current.
Trying to play a wavefile I get the Following Error.
Could Some one please tell me how to troubleshoot this?
$ waveplay sos.wav
File name : sos.wav
Sampling rate : 8000 Hz
Bits/Sample : 8 Bits
Channels : 1
Size : 214
On Friday 20 April 2007 08:32, Tony Abernethy wrote:
> Jason Beaudoin wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Use all the tricks you can for YOUR solution, including:
> > > * lots of "small" partitions
> >
> > What are the reasonings behind this?
> >
> > Thanks for the awesome post!
>
> I think it runs something l
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 01:02:17PM -0400, Richard P. Welty wrote:
> Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
> >On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:14:54AM -0600, Jeff Ross wrote:
> >>Will a U320 drive fall back to the U160 bandwidth? I'm finding
> >>conflicting advice on google, some say no problem, other say I'll ki
Yes, the upgrading to 4.1 page mentions this.
-Bob
* Frank Bax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 12:43]:
> Is there a place that documents the spamd differences from 4.0 to 4.1; or
> am I left with detecting the differences in documentation? I see 41.htm
> mentions greylist sync
Henning Brauer wrote:
* Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 14:49]:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:36:29PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 00:36]:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 10:51:56PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
I don't think NFS/AFS i
This will set you in the right direction:
http://www.undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070301144846
On 4/20/07, Frank Bax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there a place that documents the spamd differences from 4.0 to 4.1; or
am I left with detecting the differences in documentation? I see 41.
Is there a place that documents the spamd differences from 4.0 to 4.1; or
am I left with detecting the differences in documentation? I see 41.htm
mentions greylist sync which I won't need (although I could see a one-time
use when migrating boxes); greytrapping sounds interesting, might try that
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 07:56:16PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
> * Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 14:49]:
> > On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:36:29PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
> > > * Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 00:36]:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 10:51:56P
Hi guys,
Since upgrading to the latest snapshots (4/7/2007) X applications take
considerably longer to load, for instance gaim now takes 30 seconds to
load rather than the 5 or so seconds I was used to. I've tried
building the applications through ports rather than using packages
which seems to m
* Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 14:49]:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:36:29PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
> > * Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 00:36]:
> > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 10:51:56PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > > > I don't think NFS/AFS is that
Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:14:54AM -0600, Jeff Ross wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to add a second drive to the new to me SuperMicro server I
just purchased off ebay. It has an Adaptec AIC-7899 U160 controller
(dmesg below) but I'm finding a lot more U320 drives for sale th
Bullshit. just use NFS :)
-Bob
* Steven Harms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-19 17:01]:
> This isn't an OpenBSD specific solution, but you should be able to use an
> EMC san to accomplish this (we use a fiber channel setup)
>
> On 4/19/07, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:14:54AM -0600, Jeff Ross wrote:
Will a U320 drive fall back to the U160 bandwidth? I'm finding
conflicting advice on google, some say no problem, other say I'll kill
the U320 in short order, not seeing any hints in the man pages.
To the
Thanks. 4.1 has some major changes too, so bear in mind
spamd wise it's a big change from 4.0
-Bob
* Frank Bax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 08:29]:
> I'm finally upgrading from 3.5 to 4.0! I use the whitelist from puremagic
> and in the past 2.5 years I have also added anoth
Marco Peereboom wrote:
Will work just fine. Might as well purchase an mpt board (mpi).
Thanks, Marco! I would if I could but the onboard nics are dead and the
one pci-x slot is now in use by the em0 ;-)
Jeff
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:14:54AM -0600, Jeff Ross wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 08:10:10AM -0700, Manuel Ravasio wrote:
> > "pcmcia cardbus" is an oxymoron.
>
> Whoops...
> Something like "childproof" and "CiscoWorks"? :-)
>
> > pcmcia is a 16bit isa-like bus w/ 3.3v and 5v power.
> > cardbus is a pci-like 32bit bus w/ 3.3v power only.
> > pccard is a
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:14:54AM -0600, Jeff Ross wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to add a second drive to the new to me SuperMicro server I
> just purchased off ebay. It has an Adaptec AIC-7899 U160 controller
> (dmesg below) but I'm finding a lot more U320 drives for sale than I am
> U160s.
>
Will work just fine. Might as well purchase an mpt board (mpi).
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:14:54AM -0600, Jeff Ross wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to add a second drive to the new to me SuperMicro server I
> just purchased off ebay. It has an Adaptec AIC-7899 U160 controller
> (dmesg below) but I
Jason Beaudoin wrote:
>
>
>
> > Use all the tricks you can for YOUR solution, including:
> > * lots of "small" partitions
>
> What are the reasonings behind this?
>
> Thanks for the awesome post!
>
I think it runs something like this
If there is a problem somewhere on the disk,
if it's all
Hi,
I'm trying to add a second drive to the new to me SuperMicro server I
just purchased off ebay. It has an Adaptec AIC-7899 U160 controller
(dmesg below) but I'm finding a lot more U320 drives for sale than I am
U160s.
Will a U320 drive fall back to the U160 bandwidth? I'm finding
confli
On 4/20/07, Manuel Ravasio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have something that looks like a couple of pcmcia cards, which fit into two
pcmcia slots... I don't have a tester at home, so I can't check voltages.
PCMCIA and CardBus cards are physically (very slightly) different:
http://www.pcmcia.org
> "pcmcia cardbus" is an oxymoron.
Whoops...
Something like "childproof" and "CiscoWorks"? :-)
> pcmcia is a 16bit isa-like bus w/ 3.3v and 5v power.
> cardbus is a pci-like 32bit bus w/ 3.3v power only.
> pccard is a form factor for this devices also.
Hmmm...
I have something that looks like a
mickey wrote:
Maybe it's something with old PCMCIA cardbus?
"pcmcia cardbus" is an oxymoron.
pcmcia is a 16bit isa-like bus w/ 3.3v and 5v power.
cardbus is a pci-like 32bit bus w/ 3.3v power only.
pccard is a form factor for this devices also.
people can't memorize computer industries acro
> >> Maybe it's something with old PCMCIA cardbus?
> >
> > "pcmcia cardbus" is an oxymoron.
> >
> > pcmcia is a 16bit isa-like bus w/ 3.3v and 5v power.
> > cardbus is a pci-like 32bit bus w/ 3.3v power only.
> > pccard is a form factor for this devices also.
>
> people can't memorize computer i
On 2007/04/20 15:11, Mitja wrote:
> > Do you mean interrupt%? bsd.mp will probably drop that *way* down.
>
> No, memory management routines (netstat -m).
ah, right. The thing to look at there is the difference between peak
and max of mbuf clusters in use. Also look at net.inet.ip.ifq sysctl,
if t
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 06:16:32AM -0700, Manuel Ravasio wrote:
| I have a doubt...
|
| PCMCIA ethernet interface cannot negotiate more than 10Mbps, ignoring my
| trials to force 100full...
| PCMCIA wireless interface doesn't run at more than 11Mbps, ignoring my
trials
| to force 54Mbps...
|
| Mayb
I'm finally upgrading from 3.5 to 4.0! I use the whitelist from puremagic
and in the past 2.5 years I have also added another 10 ip addresses to
spamd whitelist because of problems with mail getting through. This week I
did tests on 3 of those ip addresses and we are 3/3 for current spamd
acc
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 09:03:54AM -0500, Jacob Yocom-Piatt wrote:
> from my observations redundancy is the biggest problem with NFS
> and that its ability to efficiently serve up data is more than
> ample.
Redundancy is certainly a problem, but lots of US HPC and
distributed computing sites have
At 02:09 PM 4/19/07, Charles Longeau wrote:
2007/4/19, Frank Bax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On an older box still running 3.5; gunzip/gzip does not change lastmod
> time; but on 4.0 [release] gunzip changes the lastmod time. What's the
> reason for this change?
This was a bug and it has been fi
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 06:16:32AM -0700, Manuel Ravasio wrote:
> I have a doubt...
>
> PCMCIA ethernet interface cannot negotiate more than 10Mbps, ignoring my
> trials to force 100full...
> PCMCIA wireless interface doesn't run at more than 11Mbps, ignoring my trials
> to force 54Mbps...
>
> Ma
IANAL, but sounds quite suspiscious. IPsec is an IETF standard and such
a restriction doesn't make sense unless there are shortcomings to be
hidden.
-Lars
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Claer wrote:
> Exactly. The license obliges Cisco VPN Clients to connect to Cisco
> equipments only.
> It is written on
I have a doubt...
PCMCIA ethernet interface cannot negotiate more than 10Mbps, ignoring my
trials to force 100full...
PCMCIA wireless interface doesn't run at more than 11Mbps, ignoring my trials
to force 54Mbps...
Maybe it's something with old PCMCIA cardbus?
Bud
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail ha
Joachim Schipper wrote:
there is nothing wrong with serving directly from NFS.
Really? You have a lot more experience in this area, so I will defer to
you if you are sure, but it seems to me that in the sort of system I
explicitly assumed (something like a web farm), serving everything off
Use all the tricks you can for YOUR solution, including:
* lots of "small" partitions
What are the reasonings behind this?
Thanks for the awesome post!
regards,
~Jason
Claer wrote:
> "2. Cisco Systems hereby grants you the right to install and use the
Software on an unlimited number of computers, provided that each of
those computers must use the Software only to connect to Cisco Systems
products, and subject to export restrictions in Paragraph 4 hereof."
It
Stuart Henderson wrote:
>> (em1) as up and few seconds later I mark the same interface down. My
>> network usage drops significantly, currently I am looking it shows 75%.
>
> Do you mean interrupt%? bsd.mp will probably drop that *way* down.
No, memory management routines (netstat -m). Are you sa
On Fri, Apr 20 2007 at 34:05, Lars D. Nood?n wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Claer wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19 2007 at 53:12, carlopmart wrote:
> >> Somebody have tried to use cisco vpn client to connect to openbsd ipsec
> >> gateway using user and pass or x509 certificates? Can somebody sends me
> >>
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:36:29PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
> * Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 00:36]:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 10:51:56PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > > I don't think NFS/AFS is that good an idea; you'll need very beefy
> > > > fileservers and a fas
Adam Hawes wrote:
>> The solution I came to is very simple. Currently I only need one of em
>> (dual card), so I disabled the second one. When I boot the router, my
>> network usage rises up to 96%. I simlpy mark that unusable interface
>> (em1) as up and few seconds later I mark the same interface
Pete Vickers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | +47 48 17 91 00
Systemnet AS
On 20 Apr 2007, at 10:42 AM, Claudio Jeker wrote:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 09:48:44AM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
Hi Claudio,
On Fri, 06.04.2007 at 12:09:38 +0200, Claudio Jeker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Even the most expensiv
* Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-04-20 00:36]:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 10:51:56PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > I don't think NFS/AFS is that good an idea; you'll need very beefy
> > > fileservers and a fast network.
> >
> > NFS may actually be useful; if you really need the f
Am Donnerstag, den 19.04.2007, 12:53 +0200 schrieb carlopmart:
> Hi all,
>
> Somebody have tried to use cisco vpn client to connect to openbsd ipsec
> gateway using user and pass or x509 certificates? Can somebody sends me some
> examples ?
This will not work.
The Cisco Client gets his configur
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Claer wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19 2007 at 53:12, carlopmart wrote:
>> Somebody have tried to use cisco vpn client to connect to openbsd ipsec
>> gateway using user and pass or x509 certificates? Can somebody sends me
>> some examples ?
> It's explicitely forbidden in the license.
On Thu, Apr 19 2007 at 53:12, carlopmart wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi,
> Somebody have tried to use cisco vpn client to connect to openbsd ipsec
> gateway using user and pass or x509 certificates? Can somebody sends me
> some examples ?
It's explicitely forbidden in the license. So I didn't took time to
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 09:48:44AM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
> Hi Claudio,
>
> On Fri, 06.04.2007 at 12:09:38 +0200, Claudio Jeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Even the most expensive Cisco/Foundry/Extreme switches have not the CPU
> > power to route or filter packets.
>
> how comes they boast
On 2007/04/20 09:48, Toni Mueller wrote:
> Hi Claudio,
>
> On Fri, 06.04.2007 at 12:09:38 +0200, Claudio Jeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Even the most expensive Cisco/Foundry/Extreme switches have not the CPU
> > power to route or filter packets.
>
> how comes they boast running BGP and such
Ce message est au format HTML. Si vous ne parvenez pas ` le lire, cliquez
ici.
[IMAGE]
GESTION D'ENTREPRISE
MARKETING ET COMMUNICATION
NOUVELLES TECHNOLOGIES
GESTION DU PERSONNEL
LOGISTIQUE ET EQUIPEMENT
VEHICULES ET UTILITAIRES
BOUTIQUE EN LIGNE
[IMAGE]
--
Hi Claudio,
On Fri, 06.04.2007 at 12:09:38 +0200, Claudio Jeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Even the most expensive Cisco/Foundry/Extreme switches have not the CPU
> power to route or filter packets.
how comes they boast running BGP and such stuff? Eg. Cisco 6509 and up,
or Extreme Black Diamond
"Allie D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> YES ! It's on it's way !!
got mine on wednesday :)
http://www.bsdly.net/~peter/OpenBSD41_bergen_01.jpg,
http://www.bsdly.net/~peter/OpenBSD41_bergen_02.jpg
--
Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team
http://www.blug
Tom Van Looy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually the manpages said DWL-G650 should be supported by acx, well it
> appears as an ath on my machine.
the DWL-G650 is ath, the DWL-G650+ (note the plus) is acx.
--
Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team
http://www
62 matches
Mail list logo
