Simple diff so that instead of printing
...
alternative names { httpd.example.com, secure.example.com}
...
we get
...
alternative names { httpd.example.com, secure.example.com }
...
Ross
Index: parse.y
Hi,
First, thanks to (trying) to search for solve the problem you encountered.
On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 10:08:04PM +0300, Leonid Bobrov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Like I said yesterday, I don't know how to reproduce this bug, it just
> happened to me and I got this dmesg(1):
> xterm[90461]: pledge
On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 05:09:50PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
>[...]
> I'll commit this tomorrow if no-one commits it earlier with my ok.
>
> > [Note that the behaviour of X509_REQ_free(NULL) and X509_NAME_free(NULL)
> > is not documented in the man pages, so those calls in keyproc.c are not
> >
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 05:42:32PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 15:12:09 +0200
> > From: Frederic Cambus
> >
> > Hi tech@,
> >
> > Nothing uses the rasops4 (4-bit color depth) functions anymore.
> >
> > It seems unlikely that any future new platform will ever need
Hello,
I was wondering what is the impact of increasing the number of VRFs /
Rdomains that the generic kernels are capable of supporting,
I believe it is a constant determined prior to compile,
I was just wondering if it could be increased from 256 to 65536 ?
what is the impact on kernel memory
Hi,
The field ps_uvactive in `struct process` is unused.
Generally, for checking if unveil is active, checks are done on
(ps_uvvcount != 0) or (ps->ps_uvpaths != NULL).
I assume the field is a left over from previous developpment.
The kernel still build fine without it.
Thanks.
--
Sebastien
On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 09:16:39AM +0200, Sebastien Marie wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think some reorganisation in unveil(2) man page could be good for
> comprehension.
>
> The diff belows makes the man page follow the structure for paragraphs:
>
> DESCRIPTION
> ??1. global description (unveil removes
On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 10:56:08PM +1000, Ross L Richardson wrote:
>
> The diff below just removes NULL checks before various LibreSSL *_free()
> calls, on the assumption that that's the preferred usage where it's
> documented that *_free(NULL) is safe.
Thanks, diff looks good.
I'll commit this
The diff below just removes NULL checks before various LibreSSL *_free()
calls, on the assumption that that's the preferred usage where it's
documented that *_free(NULL) is safe.
[Note that the behaviour of X509_REQ_free(NULL) and X509_NAME_free(NULL)
is not documented in the man pages, so
For some arm64-related interrupt controller work I need to be able to
compose a PCIe requester ID. Since this is a generic PCIe concept
that might be useful on other architectures (for example for IOMMU
support), I propose to add a function to the MI PCI code.
ok?
Index: dev/pci/pci.c
10 matches
Mail list logo