* Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) (dgilb...@redhat.com) wrote:
> From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert"
>
> OpenBSD doesn't like :0 as an address, switch to using 127.0.0.1
> in baddest; it's really testing the :0 port number that isn't allowed
> on anything.
>
> (The test doesn't currently run anyway beca
On 7/19/21 8:52 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) wrote:
> From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert"
>
> OpenBSD doesn't like :0 as an address, switch to using 127.0.0.1
> in baddest; it's really testing the :0 port number that isn't allowed
> on anything.
>
> (The test doesn't currently run anyway because
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)" wrote:
> From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert"
>
> OpenBSD doesn't like :0 as an address, switch to using 127.0.0.1
> in baddest; it's really testing the :0 port number that isn't allowed
> on anything.
>
> (The test doesn't currently run anyway because of the userfault
>
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 07:52:17PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) wrote:
> From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert"
>
> OpenBSD doesn't like :0 as an address, switch to using 127.0.0.1
> in baddest; it's really testing the :0 port number that isn't allowed
> on anything.
>
> (The test doesn't current
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 07:52:17PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) wrote:
> From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert"
>
> OpenBSD doesn't like :0 as an address, switch to using 127.0.0.1
> in baddest; it's really testing the :0 port number that isn't allowed
> on anything.
>
> (The test doesn't current
From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert"
OpenBSD doesn't like :0 as an address, switch to using 127.0.0.1
in baddest; it's really testing the :0 port number that isn't allowed
on anything.
(The test doesn't currently run anyway because of the userfault
problem that Peter noticed, but this gets us closer t