On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Giuseppe Magnotta
wrote:
> In the (strange) case you have many bootable partition do you think is
> safe to boot in the first active one?
>
> If your answer is yes, please find attached a new patch that in case
> there are many bootable partition then print on scre
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 06:44:41PM -0700, Tobias Weingartner wrote:
> On Saturday, February 20, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
> >
> > I vote with Ted. Booting, even the wrong partition, seems better to me
> > than not booting anything.
>
> The MBR is not really supposed to boot if it is corrupted.
On Saturday, February 20, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
>
> I vote with Ted. Booting, even the wrong partition, seems better to me
> than not booting anything.
The MBR is not really supposed to boot if it is corrupted. There
are plenty of MBR codes out there that check for this condition,
and will
I've got a bunch of "users" with no password/no way to log in, just to
keep services tidy and separated. Some of these have to connect to ssh
servers, therefore they require a .ssh/known_hosts. /etc/security thinks
this is a security risk and complains about it every night...
Index: etc/security
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 02:36:00PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Giuseppe Magnotta
> wrote:
> > Currently, the mbr will not check it there are many bootable partition
> > in the partition table. It simply start the first active partition it
> > found.
> >
> > I've ma
Hi there,
I've noticed this declaration is duplicated in control.c and control.h
the following should clear all control.c.
Index: dvmrpd/control.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/dvmrpd/control.c,v
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -d -u
On Saturday, February 20, Miod Vallat wrote:
>
> There's a huge difference between garbage in the mbr, and user error
> causing two partitions to be marked as active.
>From the point of view of the MBR, not really. They're both
corruption. One just happens to be more likely to be survivable,
bu
Ted Unangst wrote:
> Is this really an improvement? If I have two bootable partitions, at
> least one of them will boot now, letting me fix the problem. If you
> refuse to boot, now I need to dig around in my toy box for a floppy
> drive or something before I can fix it. I would prefer booting i
> > Is this really an improvement? If I have two bootable partitions, at
> > least one of them will boot now, letting me fix the problem. If you
> > refuse to boot, now I need to dig around in my toy box for a floppy
> > drive or something before I can fix it. I would prefer booting into
> > the
Tobias Weingartner wrote:
> Possibly. Is your real name "Guiseppe Magnotta"?
>
> --Toby.
My real name is Giuseppe Magnotta.
Giuseppe
On Saturday, February 20, Ted Unangst wrote:
>
> Is this really an improvement? If I have two bootable partitions, at
> least one of them will boot now, letting me fix the problem. If you
> refuse to boot, now I need to dig around in my toy box for a floppy
> drive or something before I can fix
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Giuseppe Magnotta
wrote:
> Currently, the mbr will not check it there are many bootable partition
> in the partition table. It simply start the first active partition it
> found.
>
> I've made a small modification that will check the partition status
> before going
Tobias Weingartner wrote:
> Are you ok with the modification to your copyright/comment statement above?
>
> --Toby.
Sure! So do you think is useful and can be included in official code?
Regards,
Giuseppe
I like it... for the most part.
On Saturday, February 20, Giuseppe Magnotta wrote:
> Index: mbr.S
> ===
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch/i386/stand/mbr/mbr.S,v
> retrieving revision 1.21
> diff -u -r1.21 mbr.S
> --- mbr.S 25 Jun 2007
On Saturday, February 20, Giuseppe Magnotta wrote:
>
> The original source is "$OpenBSD: mbr.S,v 1.21 2007/06/25 14:10:17 tom
> Exp $" fetched from 4.6 release.
>
> I hope this can be useful...
>
> Best Regards
>
> Giuseppe
>
>
> The patch is:
>
> diff mbr.S.orig mbr.S:
Ugh... please send '
Hi.
In this thread http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=126494185625212&w=2
it was started discussion about uvm_map.c improvements. I prepared the
diff and trying to explain it.
First, I introduce 2 trees here:
- uvm_tree_start, the RB_TREE indexed by entry's "start"
- uvm_tree_space, the RB_TREE
Han Boetes wrote:
> Could you be so kind as to provide us with a unified patch? You
> can make one with: cvs diff -u
Please find attached the diff you requested.
Best regards,
Giuseppe
? diff
? mbr
Index: mbr.S
===
RCS file: /cvs/sr
Giuseppe Magnotta wrote:
> I would like to submit a patch that will "enhance" the mbr of i386
> machines.
Could you be so kind as to provide us with a unified patch? You
can make one with: cvs diff -u
Thanks!
# Han
Hi,
I would like to submit a patch that will "enhance" the mbr of i386
machines.
Currently, the mbr will not check it there are many bootable partition
in the partition table. It simply start the first active partition it
found.
I've made a small modification that will check the partition status
19 matches
Mail list logo
