On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 11:37 PM, Theo Buehler wrote:
> With the help of semarie@ we managed to get an improved version of these
> patches upstream:
>
> https://github.com/i3/i3/pull/2161
>
> Many thanks also to bcook@ and landry@ for their handholding while I was
> fighting a hopeless battle with
With the help of semarie@ we managed to get an improved version of these
patches upstream:
https://github.com/i3/i3/pull/2161
Many thanks also to bcook@ and landry@ for their handholding while I was
fighting a hopeless battle with git.
The current version of the patches has the flaw that
$ i3-m
On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 03:53:54 -0500 Jiri B wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 03:34:43PM -0500, dan mclaughlin wrote:
> > yes they are huge beasts, but they can still be forced into cages. half my
> > posts seem to refer to back to this, but.. you can try:
> >
> > 'isolating untrusted programs in ss
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 03:34:43PM -0500, dan mclaughlin wrote:
> yes they are huge beasts, but they can still be forced into cages. half my
> posts seem to refer to back to this, but.. you can try:
>
> 'isolating untrusted programs in ssh chroot jails'
> https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=142676
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:51:07 -0500 Jiri B wrote:
> Respect for your work but I'm asking myself - what is
> the attack vector?
>
> IMO pdf viewers, browsers and similar apps would have
> much bigger sense to pledge(). Unfortunatelly they are
> huge beasts :/
>
> j.
>
yes they are huge beasts, b
Respect for your work but I'm asking myself - what is
the attack vector?
IMO pdf viewers, browsers and similar apps would have
much bigger sense to pledge(). Unfortunatelly they are
huge beasts :/
j.
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:30:43AM +0100, David Coppa wrote:
> So I'd say put this in as local patches.
> If you don't hear any loud scream for the next two weeks or so, send
> it upstream with a pull request on github.
Just built from commit; no loud screams from me, not even a wimper.
Working wi
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Ralf Horstmann wrote:
> * Theo Buehler [2015-12-20 19:26]:
>> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 06:59:56PM +0100, Ralf Horstmann wrote:
>> > gdb shows this:
>> > #0 0x0ae4d48740ca in shmget () at :2
>> [...]
>> > #8 0x0ae20f9077e4 in init_xcb_late (fontna
* Theo Buehler [2015-12-20 19:26]:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 06:59:56PM +0100, Ralf Horstmann wrote:
> > gdb shows this:
> > #0 0x0ae4d48740ca in shmget () at :2
> [...]
> > #8 0x0ae20f9077e4 in init_xcb_late (fontname=Variable "fontname"
> > is not available.
>
> Whoops, I mis
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 06:59:56PM +0100, Ralf Horstmann wrote:
> gdb shows this:
> #0 0x0ae4d48740ca in shmget () at :2
[...]
> #8 0x0ae20f9077e4 in init_xcb_late (fontname=Variable "fontname" is
> not available.
Whoops, I missed that one. Thanks for the backtrace. This means
Hi,
the diff prevents i3bar from starting here:
i3bar(26685): syscall 289 ""
gdb shows this:
#0 0x0ae4d48740ca in shmget () at :2
#1 0x0ae502e15ae4 in can_use_shm () from
/usr/local/lib/libcairo.so.12.3
#2 0x0ae502e15c3b in _cairo_xcb_connection_query_shm () from
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 09:14:45AM -0500, Bryan Everly wrote:
> Should we consider applying this diff to upstream to avoid the
> maintenance issue?
I think we should. As I wrote:
> >> I'd need some positive test reports to be persuaded
> >> to try to upstream this.
I think we need some good tes
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 02:30:24PM +0100, David Coppa wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > I understand that pledging a port adds complexity to its maintenance
> > and I am not convinced the patch below should be committed to the ports
> > tree.
> >
> > However, since
Should we consider applying this diff to upstream to avoid the
maintenance issue?
Thanks,
Bryan
> On Dec 20, 2015, at 8:31 AM, David Coppa wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Theo Buehler wrote:
>> I understand that pledging a port adds complexity to its maintenance
>> and I am not con
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Theo Buehler wrote:
> I understand that pledging a port adds complexity to its maintenance
> and I am not convinced the patch below should be committed to the ports
> tree.
>
> However, since there appears to be a considerable numer of users of i3
> among OpenBSD u
15 matches
Mail list logo