David Xu wrote:
> I definitly agree with Dan, -pthread is too ugly, it really really is
> nothing to do with compiler and should be removed.
Really? What if invoking the threading library required the compiler to
compile code differently? Surely it might require that on some platforms,
s
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, David Schwartz wrote:
> No. There are other environments that don't have -pthread
> though.
So now FreeBSD will support a flag that numerous other platforms support,
however it will support it differently from every other platform. On every
other p
> On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Scott Long wrote:
> Most everyone that writes threaded applications and runs on
> multiple platforms knows that most thread libraries are
> called libpthread and are linked to with -lpthread. Once
> we rename libkse to libpthread, the problem largely goes
> away. The port
> At 2:11 AM +0200 2003/09/12, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> > Yes, absolutely.
> Okay, it should be down in a few minutes.
> If you are serious about wanting to make the image available to
> others for use on t-shirts, I would encourage you to set up your own
> CafePress shop, as one
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 21:59:54 -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>Has anyone else run into the following when trying to run ntpd on sparc?
>
>Dec 20 05:51:37 panther2 ntpd[416]: bind() fd 5, family 2, port 123, addr
>216.136.204.96, in_classd=0 flags=1 fails: Can't assign requested address
The p
> 5. Yarrow was designed as a better replacement for most any
>PRNG by a couple of bright cryptographers. Can you do
>better than that?
Nope, I agree. Ignore my previous objections.
DS
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" i
> > /dev/random should block if the system does not contain as much
> real entropy
> > as the reader desires. Otherwise, the PRNG implementation will be the
> > weakest link for people who have deliberately selected higher levels of
> > protection from cryptographic attack.
> I don't want to reh
> From the Yarrow paper:
> ``Yarrow's outputs are cryptographically derived. Systems that
> use Yarrow's
> outputs are no more secure than the generation mechanism used.''
>
> We currently have Yarrow-256(Blowfish); wanna make it Yarrow-1024? I could
> make it so.
>
> M
> --
> Mark Murray
> You generate a new PGP keypair and start using it. Your
> co-worker reboots your machine afterwards and recovers
> the PRNG state that happens to be stashed on disk. He
> can then backtrack and potentially recover the exact same
> random numbers that you used for your key.
If that is
> > Predicting the clock's offset from reality and the two way path to
> > the server of choice is impossible, plus if people enable authentication
> > later on the packets will be choke full of high-quality entropy.
>
> Please quantify 'impossible'.
Impossible as in cannot be done. The
lock 200 is better than the specifications
indicate. If it really did alternate between 1us early pulses and 1us late
pulses, stability would be measurably impacted. NTP is very good at
smoothing things out anyway, especially since it only probes the clock every
64 seconds or so.
> That sucks severely - NONE of the common units have the PPS output?!
>
> Barf. Oh well.
Many of them do, but it's still not meant for precision timekeeping and the
exact relationship between its PPS pulse edges and UTC's second boundaries
may not be precisely specified. It's not a goo
> To that end, we'll be declaring a feature freeze on the 15th, after
> which time people should just be working on tying off the worst of the
> spurting arteries and spending more time thinking about fixing things
> like gdb than thinking about significant architectural changes. With
> any luck
Probably a Celeron 333a running at an 83.5Mhz FSB.
DS
> Ilya Naumov wrote in list.freebsd-current:
> > Chaintech 6BTM mainboard with Celeron 416A processor and 128
> Mb of memory
>
> Please excuse me -- what is a "Celeron 416A"?
>
> Regards
>Oliver Fromme
To Unsubscri
> On Thu, Oct 07, 1999 at 03:15:03PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> > > > There should be fairly few writes to the root partition, so having
> > > An opionion. I use the HP workstation model where my / is
> 1800M. I have
>
> > You are not disagreeing w
> > There should be fairly few writes to the root partition, so having
>
> An opionion. I use the HP workstation model where my / is 1800M. I have
> no use for /var and /usr and find them simply stupid in today's world.
> (except for ISP's where there is cause for a septerate /var).
>
> Lets sti
> In message <000101bf0f78$fbe58b40$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "David
> Schwartz" writes:
> : It's really not a bug, it's just a missing feature. There's
> no requirement
> : that a filesystem reclaim empty space immediately. You really
> shouldn'
> I have soft updates enabled on a fast machine at work. make
> installworld can fill up slash even though it has 15M free before the
> install. I think this is a bug in softupdates that it doesn't reclaim
> space quickly enough or in overflow situations.
It's really not a bug, it's ju
> Noone compiles without -O, so(/and) it's not supported. My take is
> that EGCS says "Hey, I am in optimization level foobar! I can optimize
> for unused code. Hmm... that's unused, so...". Either that or its
> debugging support is really uNFed up.
Actually, more likely at high enough o
> > Why shouldn't we? Noone uses machines without FPUs anymore.
> What non-ancient
> > CPU doesn't have an FPU? And we're talking about the i386 family here...
> >
>
> Embedded systems, anyone?
True, but how late a version do you really want to run on them? I've left
even my P60's at Fre
> "David Schwartz" wrote:
> >
> > > Well, we've heard various opinions and I think we can conclude that:
> > >
> > > 2. That server applications should have keepalives enabled.
> >
> > Well, I certainly don't agree with that.
> Well, we've heard various opinions and I think we can conclude that:
>
> 2. That server applications should have keepalives enabled.
Well, I certainly don't agree with that. Many server applications (web
servers, mail servers, etcetera) already have data timeouts, which makes
keepalive
You know, I was going to buy a pickup truck, but I was afraid my
neighbors
would figure that if I bought a pickup truck, they should buy one too. And
maybe a pickup truck isn't the right vehicle for them -- perhaps they didn't
even know how to drive one safely. So I bought an Explorer ins
happy with the default TCP timeout
semantics
and doesn't enforce something else is broken.
DS
> On Tue, Jun 01, 1999 at 01:59:48PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
>
> > I think he was suggesting that the apps close the connection if they
> > receive no data from
I think he was suggesting that the apps close the connection if they
receive no data from some amount of time. (Isn't this common sense?)
DS
> On Tue, Jun 01, 1999 at 01:30:31PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> > maybe we should fix our SERVER apps..
> > e.g. telnetd, sshd, etc.
> Saying that it should be an application function is bogus in my
> book, since the problem is valid for all TCP users, and there are
> clearly not any reason to duplicate the code in telnetd, ftpd,
> talkd, &c &c.
But the problem is that every application uses TCP a little bit
differentl
Why not just fix the application programs that really want timeouts but
don't implement them?
DS
> Mind you, this is only a problem because FreeBSD is to bloddy
> stable: I logged into a customers server a few days a go, it had
> been up for over a year, and had accumulated tons
With egcs, the '-O' flag doesn't specify the optimization level like it
does in GCC. It specifies the desired stability of the generated code. Lower
numbers (0,1,2) request higher stability. ;)
DS
> Dan Nelson wrote:
> > -O4 doesn't exist in egcs (or it didn't a month or so ago).
> Because if it's a day of coding, you should just do it. If it's a 3
> month project, you don't waste such time, and you should communicate it.
> The time factor is judged by folks who code for a living, and maybe it's
> a little high, but not too bad. I haven't seen this rule misapplied,
> but
> I have to comment on this, it's too outrageous. Several times in the
> past, folks have written in and asked, if they wrote some particular
> piece of software, would it get committed. They said that it was a
> large undertaking, and that they wouldn't undertake it, unless there was
> general
This is normal. It's using a lot of virtual memory. Fortunately, virtual
memory is cheap.
DS
> I'm not sure if this is related to the bug I found in 3.1,
> regarding mmaping
> devices, then forking, but with my -current NFS server:
>
> PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZERES STATE
> IMO that's a good thing, because for some reason, the RFC 1323
> extensions break a lot of older terminal servers.
One could argue that it's more accurate to state that the terminal
servers
break RFC1323, but alas the effect is the same.
DS
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo
32 matches
Mail list logo
