search for: _successfully_

...lized the ldap queries are not encrypted. I wonder why since all the requiremens for a successful encryption are given. I do have a computer account in the Active Directory.. I can see a TGS-REQ and TGS-REP is fine too. In fact ldap even asks for available SASL mechanisms. After some negotiation it _successfully_ binds using GSS SPNEGO. But.. even after this successfully established encrypted bind it keeps querying in plain text. Is there anything I can do about it? For testing purposes I set "sasl_mech gssapi" in my ldap.conf but that didn't have any impact at all. regards, Roman

...or, if people are relying on the current behavior. That's why my first patch did not change the default. That said, I do think the current behavior is not optimal. In a general sense, when listing something, an empty list is a valid outcome. If the listing tool returns an error status after _successfully_ determining that the list is empty, then the caller cannot easily know whether the tool succeeded or was unable to determine the list. For some precedence: $ mkdir x ; ls x ; echo "ls: $?" ; find x -mindepth 1 ; echo "find: $?" ls: 0 find: 0 $ awk '/foo/' /etc/passwd...

...s message appears with the same CD on an old Pentium III, so the CD is not broken, it boots perfectly on the old PC. I discussed the problem on the Slax forum but I seem to be the only one with this problem. The computer is a P4 on ASUS P5GD2, 1GB RAM, AMI BIOS, 3 SATA disks, DVD-ROM, CD-RW. It _successfully_ boots from disk several SuSE distros, Slackware 12 and the unchanged content of the incriminated CD, written to an empty partition, with the following GRUB-menu.lst entry: title Slax 6.0 RC5 root (hd1,5) kernel (hd1,5)/boot/vmlinuz init=linuxrc vga=0x31a splash=verbose \ load_ra...

On 10.01.25 00:33, Corey Hickey wrote: > I took the approach of preserving current behavior by default, but > another approach would be to: > * print "The agent has no identities." to stderr instead of stdout > * exit with a status of 0 instead of 1 Please don't. If you want to ever get people to load their privkeys into the agent *with a limited lifetime*, having a

...e a buffer yet bigger than that for > the second round of GetMemoryMap, well... on a pure standard way, we > lost the game. After calling ExitBootServices the first time we're not > supposed to perform a memory allocation and we can't go back either. After calling ExitBootServices _successfully_. > So, why not try a memory allocation anyway? It works on some > implementations (including mine) despite being forbidden by the > specification, but we're in this situation because the firmware was > already not complying with the UEFI spec. If ExitBootServices is unsuccessful,...

...than that for >> the second round of GetMemoryMap, well... on a pure standard way, we >> lost the game. After calling ExitBootServices the first time we're not >> supposed to perform a memory allocation and we can't go back either. > > After calling ExitBootServices _successfully_. (See below.) > >> So, why not try a memory allocation anyway? It works on some >> implementations (including mine) despite being forbidden by the >> specification, but we're in this situation because the firmware was >> already not complying with the UEFI spec. >...

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 11:54 PM, celelibi--- via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: > From: Sylvain Gault <sylvain.gault at gmail.com> > > Some firmware implementations may need ExitBootServices to be called > twice. The second time with an updated memory map key. > > Signed-off-by: Sylvain Gault <sylvain.gault at gmail.com> > --- > efi/main.c | 75