Exactly my point. Even if the circumstances were contrived, I think it would
good to fix it just for the sake of correctness.
The issue is actually a pattern I found not only in /etc/netstart but also in
/etc/rc. (( )) cannot deal with an empty result yet it sometimes includes calls
to sysctl
On 10/10/21 5:03 PM, Scott Cheloha wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 02:36:32PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Stuart Henderson wrote:
x1> On 2021/10/10 14:26, Scott Cheloha wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Bryan Steele wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at
This unifies the input maximums on 32-bit and 64-bit platforms.
ok?
Index: head.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/head/head.c,v
retrieving revision 1.22
diff -u -p -r1.22 head.c
--- head.c 10 Oct 2021 15:57:25 - 1.22
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 1:48 PM bm1les wrote:
> Exactly my point. Even if the circumstances were contrived, I think it
> would good to fix it just for the sake of correctness.
>
Sure, knowing what circumstances could cause a problem assists in
achieving correctness.
> The issue is actually a
Tom Murphy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here's an updated diff from Omar Polo's addition of group-last
> command to cwm. I've been using it without issues and it's
> really handy to be able to switch back to the previous
> workspace you were on with it.
>
> Many thanks to Omar Polo for doing all
> Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2021 22:27:52 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Mark Kettenis
>
> > Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2021 20:55:10 +0200 (CEST)
> > From: Mark Kettenis
> >
> > This time adding support for Sunrisepoint-H and Sunrisepoint-LP.
> > Because of all the failed attempts by Intel to get their 10nm process
> >
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 02:36:32PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> x1> On 2021/10/10 14:26, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > > Bryan Steele wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM
Stuart Henderson wrote:
x1> On 2021/10/10 14:26, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > Bryan Steele wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600,
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 09:11:50PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2021/10/10 14:26, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > Bryan Steele wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > > > On
Hi,
Here's an updated diff from Omar Polo's addition of group-last
command to cwm. I've been using it without issues and it's
really handy to be able to switch back to the previous
workspace you were on with it.
Many thanks to Omar Polo for doing all the original work. I've
just
On 2021/10/10 14:26, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Bryan Steele wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > > > did anyone
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 02:26:32PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Bryan Steele wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Bryan Steele wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > > did anyone ever use it this way, or are you getting ahead of
Bryan Steele wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > did anyone ever use it this way, or are you getting ahead of yourself.
> >
> > I don't understand the question.
>
> I've only ever seen
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > did anyone ever use it this way, or are you getting ahead of yourself.
>
> I don't understand the question.
I've only ever seen it used with -count as the first
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> did anyone ever use it this way, or are you getting ahead of yourself.
I don't understand the question.
The -count syntax was fully supported in the first revision of head(1):
did anyone ever use it this way, or are you getting ahead of yourself.
Scott Cheloha wrote:
> Hi,
>
> head(1) takes line count arguments in two ways. The legacy (1977)
> syntax is "-count" [1]. The "new" (1992) syntax is "-n count" [2].
> In either case, "count" must be a positive decimal
Hi,
head(1) takes line count arguments in two ways. The legacy (1977)
syntax is "-count" [1]. The "new" (1992) syntax is "-n count" [2].
In either case, "count" must be a positive decimal value.
Somewhere along the way, support for the legacy syntax was neutered.
At present it only works as
On Sat, 09 Oct 2021 20:43:12 -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> head(1) currently only validates the last count argument given. I
> think we ought to be stricter. You can specify the -n option an
> arbitrary number of times.
Yes, it is better to perform the check during argument processing.
OK
Missing space after "RFC" and a typo...
Ross
Index: 70.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/www/70.html,v
retrieving revision 1.87
diff -u -p -r1.87 70.html
--- 70.html 10 Oct 2021 06:32:45 - 1.87
+++ 70.html 10 Oct 2021
20 matches
Mail list logo
