On Sat Sep 22 2012 00:03, Norman Golisz wrote:
> On Sat Sep 15 2012 20:44, Norman Golisz wrote:
> > On Wed Sep 12 2012 10:23, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
> > > The diff below changes GCC's default behavior to -fstack-protector-all
> > > (i.e., add stack protection code to every function instead of just
On Sat Sep 15 2012 20:44, Norman Golisz wrote:
> On Wed Sep 12 2012 10:23, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
> > The diff below changes GCC's default behavior to -fstack-protector-all
> > (i.e., add stack protection code to every function instead of just
> > some based on heuristics), but you can still revert
On 2012/09/20 20:16, Henning Brauer wrote:
> I need your help testing. This diff has a kinda high breakage
> potential, since there are quite a few output pathes. On the plus side
> breakage is easy to spot, since that'll result in bad checksums and
> thus these packets getting dropped. Should be a
*** Merci de lire ce courriel au format HTML ***
> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:01:21 +0200
> From: Tobias Ulmer
>
> ping?
The diff looks good to me, but I haven't had the oppurtunity to test
it yet.
> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 13:48:48 +0200
> From: Christian Ehrhardt
>
> Hi,
>
> thanks to Mark, we have enough PCI bus number accounting, now to allow us
> to attach ACPI bus numbers via ACPI. A patch to do this is below.
>
> regards Christian
Hi Christian,
Any chance of having a diff wi
Curso Ejecutivo Internacional
Habilidades Gerenciales de Alto ImPACTO
Panama 10-12 de Octubre de 2012
Sheraton Panama Hotel & Convention Center
QUALITY TRAINING, presenta un extraordinario seminario que se llevará a cabo
en la ciudad de Panamá ¡No se pierda uno de los eventos más interesantes en el
ping?
On Wed Sep 19 2012 00:22, Paul Irofti wrote:
> Any reason we have this disabled?
> I ran with this diff in for quite some time w/o any problems.
> Can you test this and let me know if anything bad happens?
My Thinkpad runs stable so far, everything still seems to work fine
(suspending to RAM also)
Hi,
thanks to Mark, we have enough PCI bus number accounting, now to allow us
to attach ACPI bus numbers via ACPI. A patch to do this is below.
regards Christian
Index: arch/i386/i386/mainbus.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Jean-Marc Robert
wrote:
> This is a diff that should fix a few issues I've encountered with sftp's
> tab-complete, and a few others that I found in the process.
Thanks, these have been committed (with some mild style adjustment).
--
Darren Tucker (dtucker at zi
> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 15:41:09 +0300
> From: Paul Irofti
>
> I need this for acpi locking, okay?
>
> (I'd also like to get rid of the silly x86_* prefix to match the i386
> function name, but that's a different topic)
I disagree with the off-topic bit. What we do need is a consistent
set of
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Alexey Suslikov
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 18:50, Alexey Suslikov wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, September 19, 2012, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>>>
> arc4random() is also thread-safe (it has interal locking)
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 18:50, Alexey Suslikov wrote:
>> On Wednesday, September 19, 2012, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>>
>>> > arc4random() is also thread-safe (it has interal locking) and very
>>> > desirable for other reasons. But no way to save s
14 matches
Mail list logo
