search for: pola

Hi. Since this revision (appeared in 6.3) I think ipfw violates POLA. I mean "ipfw table N list" shows values of table in Internet '.' notation. A friend of mine was surprised to found Internet representation of this "optional 32-bit unsigned value". For example security/bruteblock stores unix timestamps here and AFAICS there is no poss...

...ere is no matching RR. Further, if VerifyHostKeyDNS and StrictHostKeyChecking are set, there is no prompting for confirmation if the connection should be allowed to proceed; I'm unsure if this is by design or not (as presented host key and known host key match), but I'd argue this violates POLA. Attached are two na?ve patches to portable (cloned from anongit at mindrot.org) that attempt to tackle the above. -- /ciao, thorduri.

hi is there any way to build 4.8 release with this fstack protection? or atleast some ports is there any good info on this? the only page i found was that ibm page but it seemed outdated. //martin

With numerous ports now requiring perl 5.6 or newer will perl be a newer version in the base of 4.9? Jeff Seeman

...at.data.frame(sorted_data) > write.table(data2,file="R_toscala.txt",append=TRUE,quote=FALSE,sep="\t",row.names=FALSE,col.names=FALSE) > rm(tmp,new_xyz,u0,u1,data,data0,data1,data2,data3,data4,templ0,templ1,f0,f1,frac,Xdet,Ydet,tthr,tth,tras_coef,sc,srs,sup,sdown,rs,lorentz,pola,rot,sorted_data) You can see that data2 is removed at each cycle together with other objects in order to free memory. Now everything is OK when the written file, "R_toscala.txt" grows roughly to 100000 lines. But my code writes wrong values after that. I suspect there might be issues wi...

Using a non-capturing group, "(?:...)" instead of "(...)", simplifies my example a bit > x <- c("Groucho <groucho at marx.com>", "<chico at marx.com>", "Harpo") > strcapture("([[:alpha:]]+)?(?: *<([[:alpha:]. ]+@[[:alpha:]. ]+)>)?", x, proto=data.frame(Name=character(), Address=character(),

On Feb 25, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Rafael Avila de Espindola wrote: >>> Can someone else try to reproduce this? > > I tried gcc.c from > http://people.csail.mit.edu/smcc/projects/single-file-programs/ and the > difference is a bit more noticeable: > > -O0 -mno-relax-all > > real 0m13.182s > user 0m12.690s > sys 0m0.450s > > -O0 > > gcc.o is

Hi all, After my last make world (updated to 4.7-RELEASE-p10) I checked which files are older than the start of the build: 338 Mar 6 2002 /boot/loader.rc 12168 Mar 6 2002 /usr/include/machine/if_wavelan_ieee.h 1564 May 1 2002 /usr/include/netinet/ip_auth.h 34148 May 1 2002 /usr/include/netinet/ip_compat.h 21840 May 1 2002 /usr/include/netinet/ip_fil.h 1905 May 1 2002

>> Can someone else try to reproduce this? I tried gcc.c from http://people.csail.mit.edu/smcc/projects/single-file-programs/ and the difference is a bit more noticeable: -O0 -mno-relax-all real 0m13.182s user 0m12.690s sys 0m0.450s -O0 gcc.o is 10932968 bytes. real 0m12.969s user 0m12.520s sys 0m0.410s gcc.o is 11410552 bytes IMHO it would still be reasonable to switch to

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3988 Summary: -a collides with --flags Product: rsync Version: 2.6.8 Platform: x86 OS/Version: FreeBSD Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: rsync@oldach.net QAContact:

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 05:35:51PM +0000, David Blaikie wrote: > optnone should work, but really noinline should probably (Chandler: Can you > confirm: is it reasonable to model noinline as "no interprocedural analysis > across this function boundary" (so FunctionAttrs should do the same thing > for noinline as it does for optnone, for example? ie: not derive any new >

...VerifyHostDNS is set and StrictHostKeyChecking is set and the host presented key matches the known host key but the RR is missing the same warning is emitted however the user is not prompted for confirmation that the connection should continue (this might be by design) but I'd argue it violates POLA. Attached are two na?ve patches to portable (cloned from anongit at mindrot.org) that attempt to tackle the above. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching the assignee of the bug.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello Everyone, On November 30th, FreeBSD 6.4 and FreeBSD 8.0 will have reached their End of Life and will no longer be supported by the FreeBSD Security Team. Since FreeBSD 6.4 is the last remaining supported release from the FreeBSD 6.x stable branch, support for the FreeBSD 6.x stable branch will also cease at the same point. Users of either of

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello Everyone, On November 30th, FreeBSD 6.4 and FreeBSD 8.0 will have reached their End of Life and will no longer be supported by the FreeBSD Security Team. Since FreeBSD 6.4 is the last remaining supported release from the FreeBSD 6.x stable branch, support for the FreeBSD 6.x stable branch will also cease at the same point. Users of either of

Hi all, I moved from 8.0-RELEASE to last week's -STABLE: $ uname -v FreeBSD 8.1-STABLE #0: Thu Sep 2 16:38:02 SAST 2010 root@XXXXX:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC and all seems well except my network card is unusable. On boot up: em0: <Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 7.0.5> port 0x3040-0x305f mem 0xe3200000-0xe321ffff,0xe3220000-0xe3220fff irq 10 at device 25.0 on pci0 em0: Setup

Hi, As a next question to my building this server. I'm nogt able to get a full verbose dmesg. Probably because the kernelbuffer for it is too small. I know there used to be a kernel option to increase it. But I can not find it with the setting in NOTES or any other place I looked.... Is it still there? Thanx, --WjW

Hi, first sorry for cross-posting but I thought this patch might interest -CURRENT users as well as people concerned by security. I wrote a patch that integrates ProPolice/SSP into FreeBSD, one step further than it has been realized so far. It is available here : http://tataz.chchile.org/~tataz/FreeBSD/SSP/ Everything is explained on the web page, but I will repeat some informations here.

Hi Everyone, This is off-topic, so please feel free to disregard it, but I'm sending it to this list in the hope that it will reach a largish number of users. I am currently looking at updating some of our advocacy material (which advertises exciting new features like SMP support), and before I do I'd like to get a better feel for why the rest of you are using FreeBSD. If you had to