On 20 July 2014 19:44, Adam Thompson athom...@athompso.net wrote:
No, what he meant was that using nc -u can produce false results.
Thank you Adam to point out my misinterpretation. Now I understand that
Sean asked about how am I sure that all those zeroes generated in one host
are really going
On Sun 20 Jul 2014 09:58:03 PM CDT, Raimundo Santos wrote:
What version of ProxmoxVE? I am considering this as a counterpart to
XenServer, but I have some kind of faith in hypervisors in Xen and VMWare
style, but in this project I can not afford VMWare prices.
I'm paying for the basic level of
Hello all!
I am testing OpenBSD 5.5 Release over XenServer 6.2 with HVM and qemu-dm
wrapper to change the default r8139 to virtio, adapted from [1].
So, to test the server private network throughput and other things related,
I am using netcat. In this fashion:
nc -lu 9000 /dev/zero /dev/null
On Jul 19, 2014, at 11:51 AM, Raimundo Santos rait...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all!
I am testing OpenBSD 5.5 Release over XenServer 6.2 with HVM and qemu-dm
wrapper to change the default r8139 to virtio, adapted from [1].
So, to test the server private network throughput and other things
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Raimundo Santos rait...@gmail.com wrote:
I am testing OpenBSD 5.5 Release over XenServer 6.2 with HVM and qemu-dm
wrapper to change the default r8139 to virtio, adapted from [1].
So, to test the server private network throughput and other things related,
I
Hello the list.
First, I wish you all a great weekend.
Second, I am wondering if someone knows or has written some tool to prevent
yourself from being locked out of your online ssh server when writing pf
rules.
Something like : copy the new pf rules in /tmp, load them, and ask the user if
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Stéphane Guedon steph...@22decembre.eu
wrote:
Hello the list.
First, I wish you all a great weekend.
Second, I am wondering if someone knows or has written some tool to prevent
yourself from being locked out of your online ssh server when writing pf
rules.
I just use something like
pfctl -v -f /etc/pf.conf.new ; sleep 30; pfctl -f /etc/pf.conf
in a tmux session. That gives me 30 seconds to test what I was going to
test and then reverts to the original file.
--
Gregor Best
--
After I run your program, let's make love like crazed
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 05:55:19, vous avez écrit :
If the user doesn't answer, that means for some reason pf has blocked ssh
connection.
This shouldn't happen as long as you don't flush your state table.
That happened quite often. Obviously I am to blame. Now I take extra
precaution. And
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 01:17:14PM +0200, St?phane Guedon wrote:
Second, I am wondering if someone knows or has written some tool to prevent
yourself from being locked out of your online ssh server when writing pf
rules.
Something like : copy the new pf rules in /tmp, load them, and ask
Test Mail, to check if its working...
that the change doesn't
introduce a regression. So please test and report problems you notice
to gil...@openbsd.org and e...@openbsd.org.
Thank you.
Eric.
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 09:33:04AM -0700, Ed Flecko wrote:
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to best test the performance
of my PF ruleset? Maybe iperf?
Well, the traffic to your machine will be highly unique based on what
you use it for, so pre-made testing tools will not be adapted
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to best test the performance
of my PF ruleset? Maybe iperf?
I'm just diving into learning PF and as I make changes to my ruleset,
it would be great if there's a good way of testing the traffic flow
through my OBSD box.
Suggestions?
Thank you,
Ed
Para visualizar correctamente este newsletter ingresa a
http://news1.bonuscupon.com.ar/r.html?uid=1.n.29hh.dk.qtd580f6eo
Para visualizar correctamente este newsletter ingresa a
http://news1.bonuscupon.com.ar/r.html?uid=1.l.29hh.bm.ap265n1ol0
test
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:04:12PM -0700, Barry Grumbine wrote:
man [ used to give me the test(1) manpage, doesn't anymore. Is that
something that needs fixin'?
something weird, right enough. the man page is still installed
(/usr/share/man/man1/[.1), but man(1) does not pick it up.
ingo
Hi,
Barry Grumbine wrote on Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:04:12PM -0700:
man [ used to give me the test(1) manpage, doesn't anymore.
Is that something that needs fixin'?
i have moved this thread to tech@, sending a patch.
Look for:
Subject: escape man(1) arguments from glob(3)
Thanks, Barry
man [ used to give me the test(1) manpage, doesn't anymore. Is that
something that needs fixin'?
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Tobias Crefeld t...@cataneo.eu wrote:
Running a pair of OpenBSD-4.8-boxes as NAT-Firewall between public
Internet and some Linux-webservers in a DMZ basically works fine so far.
But this week a client enabled RFC-1323 and his http/https-access to our
Running a pair of OpenBSD-4.8-boxes as NAT-Firewall between public
Internet and some Linux-webservers in a DMZ basically works fine so far.
But this week a client enabled RFC-1323 and his http/https-access to our
webservers didn't work any more and all he got was an
ICMP-unreachable with un-NATed
Good morning! This is Ivan from China. Recently, we launched some new LED
bulbs, so I'm in a hurry to share with you.The lumen is up to 90lm/w,
CRIgt;80Ra. If any designs apeal to you, don't forget to give me a feed
back!Meanwhile, I also work in this field over years, so I'm quite
familiar with
Web: http://www.smtgreen.com
Good morning! This is Ivan from China. Recently, we launched some new LED
bulbs, so I'm in a hurry to share with you.The lumen is up to 90lm/w,
CRIgt;80Ra. If any designs apeal to you, don't forget to give me a feed
back!Meanwhile, I also work in this field over
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 05:54:58PM -0500, Mark Felder wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:46:28 -0500, Stuart Henderson
s...@spacehopper.org wrote:
Make sure your nexthops are valid: bgpctl sh nex
I worked with my coworker on it this afternoon and he discovered the
nexthops issue. We have
its weight. When we have flaps with an
upstream provider we run into serious downtime... It takes Cisco
about 10 minutes to crunch the bgp tables whereas our tests so far
show that OpenBGPD does it in about 8 seconds. This is fantastic!
We have a test environment setup but there's one issue I
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 02:56:09 -0500, Gregory Edigarov
g...@bestnet.kharkov.ua wrote:
Not really sure (claudio@ will certainly correct me), but I know that
OpenBGPD in FreeBSD's ports is never fresh enough. And there was
changes afecting the behaviour of OpenBSD's version.
So I think you
show that OpenBGPD does it in about 8
seconds. This is fantastic!
We have a test environment setup but there's one issue I can't seem to
overcome. It might be my lack of BGP knowledge, but it seems like I'm
doing everything right. Here's the scenario:
$peer1 = cisco -- we're just
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:46:28 -0500, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.org
wrote:
Make sure your nexthops are valid: bgpctl sh nex
I worked with my coworker on it this afternoon and he discovered the
nexthops issue. We have resolved the problem for now.
Out next step is to figure out how
On 2011-03-14, Mark Felder f...@feld.me wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:46:28 -0500, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.org
wrote:
Make sure your nexthops are valid: bgpctl sh nex
I worked with my coworker on it this afternoon and he discovered the
nexthops issue. We have resolved the
provider we
run into serious downtime... It takes Cisco about 10 minutes to crunch the
bgp tables whereas our tests so far show that OpenBGPD does it in about 8
seconds. This is fantastic!
We have a test environment setup but there's one issue I can't seem to
overcome. It might be my lack
Hello,
The following diff is really important because on some machines
bge(4) gets detached because of ASPM. The following diff is also
in the latest snapshots but you can also compile a kernel with it.
So if you have a bge(4) please update/compile a kernel and get
back to me if it works or fails
--
people who love to spam me:
mark.constant...@raywhite.com
markconstant...@freeline.ws
ma...@agathon.com.au
i...@agathon.com.au
mail2ji...@compuserve.com
adult...@adultage.com
cather...@ctynet.com
sexy_ho...@wikupedia.ru
On 2011-01-31, Joachim Schipper joac...@joachimschipper.nl wrote:
Also, I've noticed that if I don't have X11 installed, I can't seem to
install certain packages (such as subversion) and certain ports
(EMACS, and even if I set FLAVOR=no_x11). What's up with that?
xbase is now mandatory for
Hey all,
I have a script to sort of kickstart an installation after doing a
bare install of OpenBSD, and it's designed to be idempotent (won't
hurt to run it several times).
Currently I install some packages, but that's a bit of a time-waster
in that it will reinstall. Is there a way I can test
of a time-waster
in that it will reinstall. Is there a way I can test for whether a
package has been installed already, given only the package name, and
not necessarily the executable name (if there is one)? I tried
pkg_info and the exit code is zero even if the package isn't
installed.
Try
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 2:29 PM, tra...@subspacefield.org wrote:
Currently I install some packages, but that's a bit of a time-waster
in that it will reinstall. Is there a way I can test for whether a
package has been installed already, given only the package name, and
not necessarily
test for whether a
package has been installed already, given only the package name, and
not necessarily the executable name (if there is one)? I tried
pkg_info and the exit code is zero even if the package isn't
installed.
When asked to install an already installed package,
pkg_add does
Hi Travis,
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:29 PM, tra...@subspacefield.org wrote:
Currently I install some packages, but that's a bit of a time-waster
in that it will reinstall. B Is there a way I can test for whether a
package has been installed already, given only the package name
of a time-waster
in that it will reinstall. B Is there a way I can test for whether a
package has been installed already, given only the package name, and
not necessarily the executable name (if there is one)? B I tried
pkg_info and the exit code is zero even if the package isn't
installed
$ pkg_info | grep ^banana- /dev/null
Could also be
$ pkg_info | grep -q ^banana-
test for whether a
package has been installed already, given only the package name, and
not necessarily the executable name (if there is one)? B I tried
pkg_info and the exit code is zero even if the package isn't
installed.
Also, I've noticed that if I don't have X11 installed, I can't
From: Chet Langin clangin () siu ! edu
Date: 2010-11-12 14:50:59
-Original Message-
snip
I have run OpenBSD in production on both VMWare server and ESXi. It
was
the only machine facing the Internet that the auditors had no
findings on.
--
Edward Ahlsen-Girard
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 01:27:21 +0100
Tomas Vavrys vav...@cleancode.cz wrote:
Is it better to test everything in Windows 7 via Virtualbox.
I would have have thought from wherever your pentest tools are?
KVM is another option
For some things, epecially panics and load tesing/dos. OpenBSD would
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 14:56:24 -0800
Bryan Irvine sparcta...@gmail.com wrote:
I've heard of people not even getting past the install even with a
hardware virtualisation capable cpu.
On VirtualBox this is probably more to do with the dynamic image size.
You have to create the disk image as
On 13 November 2010 01:50, Chet Langin clan...@siu.edu wrote:
-Original Message-
snip
I have run OpenBSD in production on both VMWare server and ESXi. It was
the only machine facing the Internet that the auditors had no findings on.
--
Edward Ahlsen-Girard
Ft Walton Beach, FL
, but I am new to BDS so I want to ask you
what is different here in virtualization. Is it better to test
everything in Windows 7 via Virtualbox. Or is it better to test
everything via Qemu in OpenBSD? Are there any restrictions? What is
your pentest lab setup like?
2) I'd like to use
I can confirm that OpenBSD doesn't always work as a virtual machine.
So I would focus on using OpenBSD as the host and using some other OS
as a client in QEMU.
If you insist and I don't know about the latest version, then vmware is
likely much more reliable than virtualbox but still more
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Michal mic...@sharescope.co.uk wrote:
I can confirm that OpenBSD doesn't always work as a virtual machine.
So I would focus on using OpenBSD as the host and using some other OS
as a client in QEMU.
If you insist and I don't know about the latest version, then
On 12/11/2010, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
If you insist and I don't know about the latest version, then vmware is
likely much more reliable than virtualbox but still more problematic
than a true install. There is a blog on the virtual box site by theo
stating he can't believe
From: Michal michal () sharescope ! co ! uk
Date: 2010-11-12 10:15:34
I can confirm that OpenBSD doesn't always work as a virtual
machine. So I would focus on using OpenBSD as the host and using
some other OS as a client in QEMU.
If you insist and I don't know about the
-Original Message-
snip
I have run OpenBSD in production on both VMWare server and ESXi. It was
the only machine facing the Internet that the auditors had no findings on.
--
Edward Ahlsen-Girard
Ft Walton Beach, FL
Which is good, but, then, it appears to me that VMWare and ESXi
At 04:01 AM 11/12/2010, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
If you insist and I don't know about the latest version, then vmware is
likely much more reliable than virtualbox but still more problematic
than a true install. There is a blog on the virtual box site by theo
stating he can't believe any OS allows
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 13:06:45 -0600
L. V. Lammert l...@omnitec.net wrote:
At 04:01 AM 11/12/2010, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
If you insist and I don't know about the latest version, then vmware is
likely much more reliable than virtualbox but still more problematic
than a true install. There is a
I've heard of people not even getting past the install even with a
hardware virtualisation capable cpu.
On VirtualBox this is probably more to do with the dynamic image size.
You have to create the disk image as a fixed size in order to
complete the install. After that it works fine.
-Bryan
of my hardware support in Windows 7. I'd like to to use HDMI
sometimes. So my questios are:
1) What is the best possible way how to setup my penetration lab? I
used Virtualbox in Archlinux, but I am new to BDS so I want to ask you
what is different here in virtualization. Is it better to test
to to use HDMI
sometimes. So my questios are:
1) What is the best possible way how to setup my penetration lab? I
used Virtualbox in Archlinux, but I am new to BDS so I want to ask you
what is different here in virtualization. Is it better to test
everything in Windows 7 via Virtualbox
to test
everything in Windows 7 via Virtualbox. Or is it better to test
everything via Qemu in OpenBSD? Are there any restrictions? What is
your pentest lab setup like?
2) I'd like to use disk encryption which prompts me for password
at startup and then there will be 2 options for boot
From: Jacob Meuser jake...@sdf.lonestar.org
Subject: Re: How to test if
sound is working?
To: misc@openbsd.org
Date: Tuesday, November 9, 2010,
4:53 AM
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 06:55:59PM
-0800, James Hozier wrote:
From: Fred Crowson fred.crow...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How to test
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 5:53 AM, Jacob Meuser jake...@sdf.lonestar.org wrote:
judging by the formatting of your emails, the patch got mangled by
your mailer.
Fred seems to be using Gmail webmail, which has an option of
downloading a message as is, without reformatting. Anyway, in my
browser
From: David Coppa dco...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How to test if sound is working?
To: James Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
Date: Tuesday, November 9, 2010, 3:15 PM
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:51 PM, James
Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
wrote:
It doesn't 'make' properly:
Of course, because
From: David Coppa dco...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How to test if sound is working?
To: James Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
Date: Tuesday, November 9, 2010, 3:53 PM
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 4:43 PM, James
Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
wrote:
From: David Coppa dco...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How
From: David Coppa dco...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How to test if sound is working?
To: James Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
Date: Tuesday, November 9, 2010, 3:53 PM
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 4:43 PM, James
Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
wrote:
From: David Coppa dco...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How
From: Jacob Meuser jake...@sdf.lonestar.org
Subject: Re: How to test if
sound is working?
To: misc@openbsd.org
Date: Monday, November 8, 2010,
4:36 AM
it appears you don't get any sound because the outputs are
controlled
by gpio pins. see if the following fixes it.
1. save this
mail
On 8 November 2010 17:10, James Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com wrote:
/snipped
Patching file azalia_codec.c using Plan A...
Hunk
#1 failed at 64.
1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to azalia_codec.c.rej
done
Dunno if that means anything.
The patching of the azailia_codec.c file failed,
From: Fred Crowson fred.crow...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How to test if
sound is working?
To: James Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
Cc:
misc@openbsd.org
Date: Monday, November 8, 2010, 9:26 PM
On 8 November
2010 17:10, James
Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
wrote:
/snipped
Patching file
On 8 November 2010 22:04, James Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com wrote:
$ cat azalia_codec.c.rej
@@ -64,6 +64,13 @@
this-name = NULL;
this-qrks = AZ_QRK_NONE;
switch (this-vid) {
+case 0x10134206:
+this-name = Cirrus Logic CS4206;
+if (this-subid == 0x106b4d00) {
On 8 November 2010 22:55, Fred Crowson fred.crow...@gmail.com wrote:
For some reason patch(1) did not insert the code into azalia_codec.c
- I would guess that the reason was that patch file had some
formatting that patch(1) did not like. Have another go at creating and
patching the file, or
From: Fred Crowson fred.crow...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How to test if
sound is working?
To: James Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
Cc:
misc@openbsd.org
Date: Monday, November 8, 2010, 10:55 PM
On 8 November
2010 22:04, James
Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
wrote:
$ cat
azalia_codec.c.rej
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 06:55:59PM -0800, James Hozier wrote:
From: Fred Crowson fred.crow...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How to test if
sound is working?
To: James Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
Cc:
misc@openbsd.org
Date: Monday, November 8, 2010, 10:55 PM
On 8 November
2010 22:04, James
From: Arnaud Bergeron aberge...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: How to test if
sound is working?
To: James Hozier guitars...@yahoo.com
Date: Sunday,
November 7, 2010, 4:36 PM
mixerctl -v:
$ mixerctl -v
inputs.dac-0:1_mute=off [ off on ]
inputs.dac-0:1=200,200
inputs.dac-2:3_mute=off
On Sun, Nov 07, 2010 at 04:18:34PM -0800, James Hozier wrote:
Oh, I've tried a lot of different combos
yesterday and this was one of them. Tried
both settings with my speakers, and
tried both settings with my headphones plugged
in.
it appears you don't get any sound because the outputs are
I've been trying to get my sound working and tried playing an audio file with
mplayer,
xmms, and vlc, and it seems like it's playing fine (I can even see the visual
bars
moving in xmms) but I get no sound at all with my speakers up all the way. Here
is
what I have done so far:
As per the FAQ's
On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 10:48:52AM -0700, James Hozier wrote:
I've been trying to get my sound working and tried playing an audio file with
mplayer,
xmms, and vlc, and it seems like it's playing fine (I can even see the visual
bars
moving in xmms) but I get no sound at all with my speakers
From: Jacob Meuser jake...@sdf.lonestar.org
Subject: Re: How to test if sound is working?
To: misc@openbsd.org
Date: Saturday, November 6, 2010, 7:14 PM
On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 10:48:52AM
-0700, James Hozier wrote:
I've been trying to get my sound working and tried
playing an audio file
On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 01:08:40PM -0700, James Hozier wrote:
From: Jacob Meuser jake...@sdf.lonestar.org
Subject: Re: How to test if sound is working?
To: misc@openbsd.org
Date: Saturday, November 6, 2010, 7:14 PM
On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 10:48:52AM
-0700, James Hozier wrote:
I've
I know http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=linux_bsd_opensolarisnum=1
Best Regards,
Ektor
I'm missing info about how much and where is real crypto and security
techniques used in those systems. Oh waitit's Phoronix. Now it's
clear. I have better toy then you benchmark type :-)
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Ektor WetterstrC6m ektw...@gmail.com
wrote:
I know
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Ektor Wetterstrvm ektw...@gmail.com wrote:
I know http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
On 06/23/10 06:36, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bullshit.fefe.de/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
[benchmarks]
facinating number of posts like this recently, all from gmail users
we've never seen
Hi
Very good performance putty :)
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:36:38 +0200, Ektor WetterstrC6m ektw...@gmail.com
wrote:
I know http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Nick Holland
n...@holland-consulting.net wrote:
On 06/23/10 06:36, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bullshit.fefe.de/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
[benchmarks]
facinating
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:36:38PM +0200, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Nick Holland
n...@holland-consulting.net wrote:
On 06/23/10 06:36, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bullshit.fefe.de/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
[benchmarks]
facinating
I agree, but you should admit that OpenBSD is clearly a looser in
regard to pure performances (e.g. I/O, compression, encryption,
etc.)
Yes, if my goal is to have ZOMG AWEZUMZ benchmarks, clearly OpenBSD
is a douchebag.
But if I want a system that doesn't make me want to initiate a mass-
I agree, but you should admit that OpenBSD is clearly a looser in
regard to pure performances (e.g. I/O, compression, encryption,
etc.)
Nick.
Bye,
Ektor
They should have also ran tests on multiple hardware, single core and
32bit.
32 bit, out performs 64bit on OpenBSD, atleast in my
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Ektor WetterstrC6m ektw...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Nick Holland
n...@holland-consulting.net wrote:
On 06/23/10 06:36, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bullshit.fefe.de/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what
crickets chirping
yawn
/crickets chirping
Continues working...
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:01:44 -0400, Nick Holland wrote:
On 06/23/10 06:36, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
I know http://bullshit.fefe.de/ is wrong / outdated /
non-scientific / whatever... But what about this? Phoronix has more
credibility imho...
[benchmarks]
facinating number of posts like
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:20:34 +0200, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
Bye,
Promise?
*** NOTE *** Please DO NOT CC me. I am subscribed to the list.
Mail to the sender address that does not originate at the list server is
tarpitted. The reply-to: address is provided for those who feel compelled to
reply
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Rod Whitworth glis...@witworx.com wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:20:34 +0200, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
Bye,
Promise?
Sure, this is my last mail on the topic. I only wanted to know Your
opinions about these types of benchmarks...
By the way, I like OpenBSD and I
By the way, I like OpenBSD and I really appreciate its strong points
but, unlike You, I have no problems in admitting its weaknesses (I see
to much zealotry here)...
Not that I have a lot of room to talk because I haven't submitted a patch
yet... However, I think the general belief is that
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 08:39:20AM -0400, Adam M. Dutko wrote:
Not that I have a lot of room to talk because I haven't submitted a patch
yet...
this statement is weird, in some way.
reyk
this statement is weird, in some way.
I concur. I'll shutup. :-)
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Reyk Floeter r...@openbsd.org wrote:
this statement is weird, in some way.
that statement is self-referential . . . so, I agree, it's a bit weird ;-)
reyk
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 14:29:24 +0200
Ektor WetterstrC6m ektw...@gmail.com wrote:
(I see to much zealotry here)...
It is not zealotry at all. Just a want to be straight and get things
correct. Questions which turn out, to be next to meaningless in the
real world, can annoy.
If I knew what tests
What are the unsurpassable real world weaknesses in OpenBSD, that you
know of?
Lots of fake people attacking the project on the mailing lists makes
them a poor resource for users.
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
What are the unsurpassable real world weaknesses in OpenBSD, that you
know of?
Lack of proper SMP support, inefficient threading (old userland-only
thread library), no support for modern filesystems (not even FFS2!),
2010/6/24, Ektor WetterstrC6m ektw...@gmail.com:
filesystems (not even FFS2!),
??
Please take a look at man newfs?
--
IMPORTANT: DO NOT send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents.
--
IMPORTANT: DO NOT send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents.
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 04:53:09PM +0200, Ektor Wetterstrvm wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
What are the unsurpassable real world weaknesses in OpenBSD, that you
know of?
Lack of proper SMP support, inefficient threading (old
101 - 200 of 348 matches
Mail list logo
