Hello,
In the manual page for syspatch(8), it provides a list of options, yet
does not specify how to invoke it for fetching and installing the
latest patches.
To avoid this confusion, it is worth adding a line like this:
"When invoked without options, syspatch(8) will fetch and install the
late
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 07:12:38PM +1100, bytevolc...@safe-mail.net wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In the manual page for syspatch(8), it provides a list of options, yet
> does not specify how to invoke it for fetching and installing the
> latest patches.
>
> To avoid this confusion, it is worth adding a li
On 09/11/16(Wed) 14:55, David Gwynne wrote:
> since counters are an array of uint64_t values, this uses an enum
> to list the indexes into such an array.
>
> we still export an ipstat struct to userland (which you can see
> with netstat -sp ip). the export cheats a bit because we know that
> the s
On 08/11/16(Tue) 17:23, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 03:36:22PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > [...]
> > To add 127.0.0.1 properly it's another story as currently netstart(8)
> > sets it.
>
> I would love to kill this part out of netstart(8). 127.0.0.1 should always
> exists.
On 2016/11/09 11:55, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 08/11/16(Tue) 17:23, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 03:36:22PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > To add 127.0.0.1 properly it's another story as currently netstart(8)
> > > sets it.
> >
> > I would love to kill this p
On 09/11/16(Wed) 11:41, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2016/11/09 11:55, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > On 08/11/16(Tue) 17:23, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 03:36:22PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > To add 127.0.0.1 properly it's another story as currently netst
* Martin Pieuchot [2016-11-09 11:55]:
> On 08/11/16(Tue) 17:23, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 03:36:22PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > I'm not sure to understand the benefit. What's the use case for loop(4)?
> > 2 name spaces, so that I don't have a conflict if I use lo1
On 09/11/16(Wed) 11:41, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> [...] I bet the majority of people doing this use exactly lo1.
> (Changes I'd need to make on all bgp routers to handle this: ospfd,
> ospf6d, pf, and rename hostname.lo1).
You only need to change if you're using lo1 *and* rdomain 1 in the sam
On 2016/11/09 12:55, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> >
> > I'm using that, and I think many people using an IGP will be too (you
> > want services - e.g. ssh, snmp, ntp, bgp - to stay working even when a
> > physical interface is down - and at least where the IGP is OSPF you
> > want those addresses hang
Hi tech@,
this patch contains fixes for two bugs that break IKE rekeying
initiated by iked. Please review, and apply or let me know what has to
be changed! Both bugs are fixed by initializing the respective
structures of the new IKE SA (struct iked_sa *nsa in the
ikev2_ike_sa_rekey function):
For
This is the last installed file whose permissions are dependent on the
umask.
Index: gnu/usr.bin/texinfo/Makefile.bsd-wrapper
===
RCS file: /var/cvs/src/gnu/usr.bin/texinfo/Makefile.bsd-wrapper,v
retrieving revision 1.44
diff -u -p -r
On 09/11/16(Wed) 12:18, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2016/11/09 12:55, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm using that, and I think many people using an IGP will be too (you
> > > want services - e.g. ssh, snmp, ntp, bgp - to stay working even when a
> > > physical interface is down - and at lea
On 11/09/16 15:11, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
...
Fair point. What about adding backward compatible goo to help people
doing the transition:
# ifconfig lo1 create
# ifconfig vether0 rdomain 1
warning: lo1 cannot be used for rdomain 1
# ifconfig lo
lo0: flags=8049 mtu 32768
index 8 priority
On 09/11/16(Wed) 16:29, Andreas Bartelt wrote:
> On 11/09/16 15:11, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> ...
> > Fair point. What about adding backward compatible goo to help people
> > doing the transition:
> >
> > # ifconfig lo1 create
> > # ifconfig vether0 rdomain 1
> > warning: lo1 cannot be used for rd
On 11/09/16 16:43, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
On 09/11/16(Wed) 16:29, Andreas Bartelt wrote:
On 11/09/16 15:11, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
...
Fair point. What about adding backward compatible goo to help people
doing the transition:
# ifconfig lo1 create
# ifconfig vether0 rdomain 1
warning: lo1 can
This patch accomplishes two things for umb(4) connections. One, some SIM
cards have a plus at the beginning of the phone number while others do
not. In my case, an AT&T Wireless SIM card in the US has the plus where
a T-Mobile SIM card in Germany does not. The output of ifconfig(8)
originally added
On Wed, 9 Nov 2016 13:16:46 +
Thomas Klute wrote:
> Hi tech@,
>
> this patch contains fixes for two bugs that break IKE rekeying
> initiated by iked. Please review, and apply or let me know what has to
> be changed! Both bugs are fixed by initializing the respective
> structures of the new I
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 03:55:29PM +0100, Gregor Best wrote:
> [...]
> I can't reproduce the problem anymore. If it does turn up again, I'll
> collect the output of route monitor. In the mean time, thanks a bunch
> for your help :)
> [...]
It happened again, this time in a slightly more convo
The following diff adds support for listening multiple addresses (thus
for dual-stack setups). Multiple "listen on" settings are allowed, the
default is to listen on 0.0.0.0 and :: (currently, only 0.0.0.0).
A single "listen on hostname" line arbitrarily supports up to 16
addresses.
It also twea
The two options metioned in the subject work on IPv4 sockets but are
invalid on IPv6 sockets. Tweak code to set different socket options
when dealing with a v6 socket.
ok?
Index: usr.sbin/httpd/server.c
===
RCS file: /d/cvs/src/us
tedu@ proposed suppressing that symlink a while ago. The base system
had been fixed at that time, and a bulk build (thanks ajacoutot@) didn't
show any fallout. https://codesearch.debian.net/ doesn't report
anything that might be affected.
ok?
Index: include/Makefile
==
On Wed, 9 Nov 2016 09:58:51 +0100
Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 07:12:38PM +1100, bytevolc...@safe-mail.net
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > In the manual page for syspatch(8), it provides a list of options,
> > yet does not specify how to invoke it for fetching and installing
> >
> > >
> > > In the manual page for syspatch(8), it provides a list of options,
> > > yet does not specify how to invoke it for fetching and installing
> > > the latest patches.
> > >
> > > To avoid this confusion, it is worth adding a line like this:
> > >
> > > "When invoked without options, sy
23 matches
Mail list logo
