On 01:38+0400, Apr 11, 2002, zhuravlev alexander wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 11:26:19PM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> > [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]:/usr/home/lofi > sftp [user]@[host]
> > Connecting to [host]...
> > [user]@[host]'s password:
> > sftp> get nonexistentfile
> > Couldn't stat remot
Howdy,
I would have lucked out if it wasn't reliable :-)
If you do all the right things, such as follow the commit logs and test,
test, test, you can get a snapshot of current that will prove reliable for a
certain number of tasks. It had three months of testing before going into
production, so I
Do you own a Harley? Do the Mosh Pit? You definitely like riding the edge of
insanity...
-current is always in a state of flux... I say you lucked out...
FreeBSD is killer stuff, but, I personally wouldn't risk a job on the odds of getting
a stable -current when I needed one...
Chris Knigh
In giving the iso 5.0-DP1 a try I ran into the following. I have a
clean and was wanting to create a simple trust between two systems
using rsh and /.rhosts authentication (yea, i know rsh is bad but our
silly software can run over ssh yet). So, I did the usual steps:
created /root/.rhosts w
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 12:00:13PM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> A good place for this to be documented is the "NAMEI OPERATION FLAGS"
> section of the namei(9) manual page.
I don't believe this option will exist long enought for it to need to be
documented. Jeff changed the default, but left th
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 11:26:19PM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]:/usr/home/lofi > sftp [user]@[host]
> Connecting to [host]...
> [user]@[host]'s password:
> sftp> get nonexistentfile
> Couldn't stat remote file: No such file or directory
> Segmentation fault (core dumped)
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]:/usr/home/lofi > sftp [user]@[host]
Connecting to [host]...
[user]@[host]'s password:
sftp> get nonexistentfile
Couldn't stat remote file: No such file or directory
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
--- snip
Anyone else seeing this? Yesterday's current with base-system openss
$B!!FMA3$N%a!<%k$NG[?.?<$/$*OM$S?=$7>e$2$^$9!#(B
$B!!$3$l$O(BWEB$B>e$K%"%I%l%9$r8x3+$5$l$F$$$kJ}$rBP>]$KG[?.$7$F$$$k9-9p(B
$B!!%a!<%k$G$9!#:#8e0l@Z$N%a!<%kG[?.ITMW$NJ}$O$3$N%a!<%k$r$=$N$^$^(B
$B!!$4JV?.$/$@$5$$!#(B
$B!!7G<(HD$KEj9F$9$k$h$j8z2LE*$G$9!*(B
$B!y!!#D#MMQ%a!<%
[please trim current@ from the CC list on reply]
> IMHO the SQL code you quote in the PR should fail with an ``invalid
> time'' error.
There's some truth to that... but Apr 7th 2am -8:00 isn't an invalid
datetime. It isn't correct, Apr 7th 3am -7:00 is the correct time,
but they're identical b
System Administrator wrote:
>
> Your message
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Bug in m_split() ?
> Sent:Wed, 10 Apr 2002 09:23:16 -0700
>
> did not reach the following recipient(s):
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 10 Apr 2002 09:23:21 -0700
> The e-mail
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> As for other occourences of the use of __GNUC__ without a check if it is
> defined: I will wrap them as soon as I review my own patches again.
Other occurrences are mostly correct. __GNUC__ is 0 in cpp expressions
if it is used without it being
Hi,
I've cc'd -standards as I think this would be of interest there.
IMHO the SQL code you quote in the PR should fail with an ``invalid
time'' error.
Personally I like the fact that mktime() returns -1 - it allows
date's -v option to act sanely, although I must admit it was a PITA
to get ri
On 10 Apr, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:58:42PM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>> quad.h contains:
>> ---snip---
>> /*
>> * XXX
>> * Compensate for gcc 1 vs gcc 2. Gcc 1 defines ?sh?di3's second argument
>> * as u_quad_t, while gcc 2 correctly uses int. Unfortunately,
On 10 Apr, Bruce Evans wrote:
>> * XXX
>> * Compensate for gcc 1 vs gcc 2. Gcc 1 defines ?sh?di3's second argument
>> * as u_quad_t, while gcc 2 correctly uses int. Unfortunately, we still use
>> * both compilers.
>> Is this still valid? Does someone really use gcc 1 to compile FreeBSD?
>
On Tue, 09 Apr 2002 15:06:19 -0400, Jeff Roberson wrote:
> Right, sorry. There was some minimal discussion about this on arch quite
> a while ago. Basically, it allows namei to return leafs locked with
> shared locks instead of exclusive locks when a flag is set.
>
> This not only reduces co
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:58:42PM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> quad.h contains:
> ---snip---
> /*
> * XXX
> * Compensate for gcc 1 vs gcc 2. Gcc 1 defines ?sh?di3's second argument
> * as u_quad_t, while gcc 2 correctly uses int. Unfortunately, we still use
> * both compilers.
> */
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> quad.h contains:
> ---snip---
> /*
> * XXX
> * Compensate for gcc 1 vs gcc 2. Gcc 1 defines ?sh?di3's second argument
> * as u_quad_t, while gcc 2 correctly uses int. Unfortunately, we still use
> * both compilers.
> */
> #if __GNUC__ >= 2
>
On 9 Apr, aaron wrote:
> Hmmm... BTW I would be very interested how icc compares to gcc32.
> Seems both have code to optimize for MMX, SSE, and the nice vector stuff
> in recent i386 processors.
Feel free to send results. :-)
> This might not be such an issue with the kernel but I thouhgt it c
Howdy,
I'd just like to thank the FreeBSD team for an outstanding job.
I've got a FreeBSD-current system in production running an Intranet that has
just exceeded one year's uptime. Admittedly, the snapshot I built was
30/10/2000, but it does go to show that current can indeed be used for
producti
On Tuesday, 9 April 2002 at 22:56:33 -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:04:34PM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>> Since a recent upgrade to one of my development systems, I can't use
>> nfsd. I've completely reinstalled /etc, set all appropriate knobs in
>> rc.conf. rpc
20 matches
Mail list logo
