On Jun 4, 9:39 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jun 4, 2008, at 9:02 AM, mabshoff wrote:
> > Aside from that it would be good with somebody with deeper Solaris-
> > internals fu than me could enlighten me if /dev/random is the
> > preferred source of randomness. On linux at
On Jun 4, 2008, at 9:02 AM, mabshoff wrote:
> On Jun 4, 5:29 pm, Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> On Wednesday 04 June 2008, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
>>> Yes, what could go wrong? ;)
>>
>>> Seriously: What I meant above is that we ought to see on Solaris
>>> only
>>> if switching t
On Jun 4, 5:29 pm, Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 June 2008, mabshoff wrote:
> > Yes, what could go wrong? ;)
>
> > Seriously: What I meant above is that we ought to see on Solaris only
> > if switching to /dev/urandom as an entropy source does fix the
> > infinite
On Wednesday 04 June 2008, mabshoff wrote:
> On Jun 4, 3:08 pm, Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> wrote:
> > > Well, I have seens the same problem on other Solaris boxen and we do
> > > not explicitly just /dev/random, but we do so via GNUTLS. We might
> > > patch GNUTLS slightly on Solaris
On Jun 4, 3:08 pm, Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Well, I have seens the same problem on other Solaris boxen and we do
> > not explicitly just /dev/random, but we do so via GNUTLS. We might
> > patch GNUTLS slightly on Solaris, but up to know it isn't 100% clear
> > to my why t
> Well, I have seens the same problem on other Solaris boxen and we do
> not explicitly just /dev/random, but we do so via GNUTLS. We might
> patch GNUTLS slightly on Solaris, but up to know it isn't 100% clear
> to my why this happens.
Yeah, patching the random number generation of the SSL pac
On Jun 4, 12:51 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jun 4, 5:13 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hello folks,
Hi David,
> > with malb's libSingular fix we are down from 120+ segfaults to about
> > 100 doctest failures, none of them segfaults. While that does not
On Jun 4, 5:13 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> with malb's libSingular fix we are down from 120+ segfaults to about
> 100 doctest failures, none of them segfaults. While that does not look
> like much of an improvement nearly all of those errors are caused by
> the fol
