Hi,
I upgraded my private mail host today to the latest 5.8-current snapshot (5th
of october). Now bgpd keeps crashing. The previous snapshot (from around 14th
of september) was working fine.
I have a quite simple setup with only the reference configuration for spamd,
using http://bgp-spamd.ne
Hi Nicholas,
Thanks for taking the time to review this. I'll try to elaborate on my
reasoning below. Please excuse my wordiness, I'm just not genetically
capable of being brief...
On 2015-10-06 00:05, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
> I think it should just return whatever copyinstr does and not go
> s
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Several people seem to complain on misc@ that they're seeing watchdog
> timeouts on em(4). But none of them bother to submit a proper bug
> report to bugs@. Anyway, here is a diff that might fix the issue.
> Please test, even if you're not
Hi
I think it should just return whatever copyinstr does and not go
swapping around error numbers, we don't do that anywhere else.
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:15:33PM +0200, Benny Lofgren wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I was playing around with tame() today, and have a couple of minor
> suggestions:
>
Benny Lofgren wrote:
> On 2015-10-05 22:21, Rob Pierce wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 05:38:34PM +0059, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:50:49AM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
> > Is it KNF compliant to have an exit() or return() at the same indentation as
> > the closing functio
Rob Pierce wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 05:38:34PM +0059, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:50:49AM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
> > > There are some offending braces. I just added leading tabs in the right
> > > places to correct indentation.
> > >
> > > Rob
> > >
> >
> > why
On 2015-10-05 22:21, Rob Pierce wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 05:38:34PM +0059, Jason McIntyre wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:50:49AM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
> Is it KNF compliant to have an exit() or return() at the same indentation as
> the closing function brace? For example:
>
>
Hi guys,
I was playing around with tame() today, and have a couple of minor
suggestions:
- Return EINVAL instead of ENAMETOOLONG if the request argument string
is too long. ENAMETOOLONG translates to "File name too long", which I
think is misleading. Maybe E2BIG would be an alternative, but EINV
I find this approach easier to follow and it doesn't mess with
ic->ic_scan_lock which is supposed to be managed by the net80211 layer.
Seems to work just as well as the old code.
OK?
Index: if_iwm.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/pc
This matches what all other wifi drivers seem to be doing.
ifconfig iwm0 lladdr random still works.
ok?
Index: if_iwm.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/pci/if_iwm.c,v
retrieving revision 1.52
diff -u -p -r1.52 if_iwm.c
--- if_iwm.c
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 04:21:34PM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 05:38:34PM +0059, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:50:49AM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
> > > There are some offending braces. I just added leading tabs in the right
> > > places to correct indenta
Several people seem to complain on misc@ that they're seeing watchdog
timeouts on em(4). But none of them bother to submit a proper bug
report to bugs@. Anyway, here is a diff that might fix the issue.
Please test, even if you're not experiencing any problems.
Thanks,
Mark
Index: if_em.c
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 05:38:34PM +0059, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:50:49AM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
> > There are some offending braces. I just added leading tabs in the right
> > places to correct indentation.
> >
> > Rob
> >
>
> why are you indenting? the point of "-o
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 05:30:33PM -0600, Bob Beck wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 05:27:51PM -0600, Bob Beck wrote:
> >
> > ** OpenBSD is turning 20, on January 18th 2015 **
>
> Ok, and I'm an idiot.. OCTOBER 18th, 2015 I.E. coming up in two weeks
> from today :)
lol,
> The problem of exec(2) is if we permit it (without herited tame flags)
> your program has a way to go out his expected behaviour. For example, if
> a tamed program has a bug that permit execution of code, the attacker
> would just has to do "exec(something-else)" to escape the imposed
> policy. W
Hi Remco,
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 07:47:26PM +0200, Remco wrote:
> Sebastien Marie wrote:
>
> > Just a remark about "proc" request. It won't allow calling exec(2), but
> > only fork(2) (and some others, see the man page for details).
> >
> > exec(2) is really special for a tamed program: allowin
> Assume you have a bad program1 and you write your tame(2)-ed program2 that
> disallows execution of program1. But you also have to use my un-tame(2)-ed
> program3 that allows execution of program1. How does your tame(2)-ed
> program2 protect you now against executing program1 ? You still risk
Hi,
the issetugid(2) manpage only mentions the real and effective uid
and gid, yet the implementation in kern_exec.c compares not only
those two but also the saved uid and gid.
Which of these is desired?
Should an executable (as opposed to library code) use issetugid()
to check whether it's call
2015-09-26 21:49 GMT+03:00 Michael Reed :
> The `clean' target takes optional arguments, so denote that in
> the item header. Additionally, the subtargets are fixed strings,
> not variables, so change the use of Va to Cm to reflect that.
Well, technically "clean=" is not a target, but a hack that
Sebastien Marie wrote:
> Just a remark about "proc" request. It won't allow calling exec(2), but
> only fork(2) (and some others, see the man page for details).
>
> exec(2) is really special for a tamed program: allowing it could permit
> to defeat the purpose of tame.
>
I'm trying to understan
ping
On 09/26/15 14:49, Michael Reed wrote:
> The `clean' target takes optional arguments, so denote that in
> the item header. Additionally, the subtargets are fixed strings,
> not variables, so change the use of Va to Cm to reflect that.
>
>
> Index: bsd.port.mk.5
> ==
ed has a lot of global variables, mark the ones not used outside
the source file static. Also make stdin unbuffered since that is
the same as using a single-byte buffer.
- todd
Index: bin/ed/buf.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/ed/buf.
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:50:49AM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
> There are some offending braces. I just added leading tabs in the right
> places to correct indentation.
>
> Rob
>
why are you indenting? the point of "-offset indent" in the list/display
is to do just that.
jmc
> Index: style.9
> =
I'm not 100% sure about the DES bits, though they will not hurt
anything.
- todd
Index: login_chpass/login_chpass.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/libexec/login_chpass/login_chpass.c,v
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -p -u -r1.16 login_chp
There are some offending braces. I just added leading tabs in the right
places to correct indentation.
Rob
Index: style.9
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man9/style.9,v
retrieving revision 1.62
diff -u -p -r1.62 style.9
--- style.9
- Original Message -
> From: "Jason McIntyre"
> To: "tech"
> Sent: Monday, October 5, 2015 11:41:57 AM
> Subject: Re: missing colon delimiters in style.9
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:21:24AM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 03:18:06PM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote:
>> >
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:21:24AM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 03:18:06PM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 10:56:45PM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
> > >
> > > Index: style.9
> > > ===
> >
>
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 03:18:06PM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 10:56:45PM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
> >
> > Index: style.9
> > ===
>
> there are many more places in this place you'd have to add colons if you
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 10:56:45PM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
>
> Index: style.9
> ===
there are many more places in this place you'd have to add colons if you
wanted to do it consistently. generally i do use colons for stuff like
this
Index: style.9
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man9/style.9,v
retrieving revision 1.62
diff -u -p -r1.62 style.9
--- style.9 5 Oct 2015 01:22:34 - 1.62
+++ style.9 5 Oct 2015 11:41:35 -
@@ -471,12 +471,12 @@ is
Alexey Suslikov gmail.com> writes:
> If there is a need to debug something in azalia.c, defining DIAGNOSTIC
> is overkill so replace two instances of DIAGNOSTIC with AZALIA_DEBUG
> (DPRINTF->printf suggested by ratchov ).
>
> Also, entirely remove 3rd instance of DIAGNOSTIC. Normally it is not
31 matches
Mail list logo