Menu
▾
▴
devil-linux-develop
|
From: Heiko Z. <hz...@pr...> - 2003-07-10 16:33:52
|
computers.... What is "free" telling you? I'm not aware of any problems which could cause this. Heiko On 07/10/2003 10:49:06 AM Bruce Smith wrote: >> One more thing, what's about sorting the menu entries for "packages"= >and >> "services" ? Would be much easier to find something. > >Done. Changes committed. > >I've been working on a REALLY STRANGE _intermittent_ problem. > >Sometimes the setup script will totally flake out. "for" loops push >ENTER keys into the keyboard stack. It's like I have a sticky keyboar= d, >but I don't!!! Tracing the script shows it's happening in the middle = of >long for loops, not when I'm touching the keyboard. > >Once the machine is booted (VMware), it either happens never happens >(consistently), or it happens randomly. REBOOT and the results may >change. > >I _think_ it is memory related. The more optional packages I load >during boot, the more likely it is to happen. The more memory I give = to >VMware, the less likely it is to happen. It happens very frequently a= t >64MB & 96MB. Sometimes at 128MB. Only happened once at 256MB. > >This is REALLY WEIRD. The trace shows it has nothing to do with the >"dialog" program, it's in a standard "for" loop with "cut" & "sed" >commands. > >Has anything changed in the kernel or major libraries that could cause= >this? > >I originally thought it has something to do with my adding gnugk, so I= >got rid of gnugk and ran a mrproper/build/install last night. No diff= . > >I'll try and dig up a real PC to see if I can make it happen there ...= >This is driving me nuts!!! > >- BS > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.Net email sponsored by: Parasoft >Error proof Web apps, automate testing & more. >Download & eval WebKing and get a free book. >www.parasoft.com/bulletproofapps >_______________________________________________ >Devil-linux-develop mailing list >Dev...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/devil-linux-develop = |
|
From: John v. V. <joh...@ya...> - 2003-07-10 20:29:17
|
This is added to Gentoo and OpenBSD now for buffer overflow protection. =============================================== What's the stack-smashing protector? It is a GCC (Gnu Compiler Collection) extension for protecting applications from stack-smashing attacks. Applications written in C will be protected by the method that automatically inserts protection code into an application at compilation time. The protection is realized by buffer overflow detection and the variable reordering feature to avoid the corruption of pointers. The basic idea of buffer overflow detection comes from StackGuard system. http://www.trl.ibm.com/projects/security/ssp/ =============================================== ===== CXN, Inc. Contact: jo...@th... President, The Linux Society http://groups.yahoo.com/group/linux-society linux society distro -> http://www.thinman.com/eLSD/readme ThinMan is a registered trademark of CXN, Inc __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2003-07-10 20:30:31
|
> computers.... > > What is "free" telling you? > I'm not aware of any problems which could cause this. I hope I'm not speaking too soon, but... I recompiled to a UP kernel (was SMP), and VMware seems to be much happier now. [knock wood] I also checked in the GNU H.323 Gatekeeper and iptstate utility. - BS |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2003-07-10 21:34:38
|
> computers.... No kidding. :-) > What is "free" telling you? That I have tons of memory available. I also have plenty of RAM disk available (according to "df"). The problem is less intermittent with more memory, but does not go away completely. I think it's related to memory _cache_. It usually fails the first time, then mostly works (because it's in memory cache?). > I'm not aware of any problems which could cause this. I tried it on a "real" PC (P2-350 128MB) and I can NOT make it fail. Hopefully it's just a VMware thing. I noticed I had the kernel compiled as SMP, so I'm now compiling a UP kernel to try in VMware ... - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2003-07-12 00:00:17
|
Bruce Smith wrote: >>computers.... >> >> > >No kidding. :-) > > > >>What is "free" telling you? >> >> > >That I have tons of memory available. >I also have plenty of RAM disk available (according to "df"). > >The problem is less intermittent with more memory, but does not go away >completely. I think it's related to memory _cache_. It usually fails >the first time, then mostly works (because it's in memory cache?). > > > >>I'm not aware of any problems which could cause this. >> >> > >I tried it on a "real" PC (P2-350 128MB) and I can NOT make it fail. >Hopefully it's just a VMware thing. > >I noticed I had the kernel compiled as SMP, so I'm now compiling a UP >kernel to try in VMware ... > > I'm using a SMP Kernel and it works fine under VMWare, but I also use an older version. Heiko |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2003-07-12 01:30:36
|
> >>I'm not aware of any problems which could cause this. > > > >I tried it on a "real" PC (P2-350 128MB) and I can NOT make it fail. > >Hopefully it's just a VMware thing. > > > >I noticed I had the kernel compiled as SMP, so I'm now compiling a UP > >kernel to try in VMware ... > > > I'm using a SMP Kernel and it works fine under VMWare, but I also use > an older version. Upgrade to VMware version 4 and see what happens! :-) So far the UP kernel is running fine for me under VMware 4. - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2003-07-12 01:40:21
|
Bruce Smith wrote: >>>>I'm not aware of any problems which could cause this. >>> >>>I tried it on a "real" PC (P2-350 128MB) and I can NOT make it fail. >>>Hopefully it's just a VMware thing. >>> >>>I noticed I had the kernel compiled as SMP, so I'm now compiling a UP >>>kernel to try in VMware ... >>> >> >>I'm using a SMP Kernel and it works fine under VMWare, but I also use >>an older version. > > > Upgrade to VMware version 4 and see what happens! :-) > > So far the UP kernel is running fine for me under VMware 4. The upgrade costs money and v3 works fine for me. ;-) Heiko |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2003-07-12 01:47:16
|
> > Upgrade to VMware version 4 and see what happens! :-) > > > > So far the UP kernel is running fine for me under VMware 4. > > The upgrade costs money and v3 works fine for me. ;-) I hear you! :-) Can you send me your .config tonight, that you use to make ISO's for download? (so I can start a new compile overnight) Thanks! - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2003-07-12 02:00:19
Attachments:
.config
|
Bruce Smith wrote: >>>Upgrade to VMware version 4 and see what happens! :-) >>> >>>So far the UP kernel is running fine for me under VMware 4. >> >>The upgrade costs money and v3 works fine for me. ;-) > > > I hear you! :-) > > Can you send me your .config tonight, that you use to make ISO's for > download? (so I can start a new compile overnight) Thanks! > Sure, but the only thing I do is selecting everything. Heiko |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2003-07-12 02:19:06
|
> > Can you send me your .config tonight, that you use to make ISO's for > > download? (so I can start a new compile overnight) Thanks! > > Sure, but the only thing I do is selecting everything. OK, I can do that. Thanks! :-) Did you see my email on the list about me making ISO's I compile available for download on a server of mine (here in the US)? Is that OK with you? I figured I'd compile them for i586 since some people were complaining about not having a i686. - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2003-07-12 02:30:19
|
Bruce Smith wrote: >>>Can you send me your .config tonight, that you use to make ISO's for >>>download? (so I can start a new compile overnight) Thanks! >> >>Sure, but the only thing I do is selecting everything. > > > OK, I can do that. Thanks! :-) > > Did you see my email on the list about me making ISO's I compile > available for download on a server of mine (here in the US)? > Is that OK with you? > > I figured I'd compile them for i586 since some people were complaining > about not having a i686. > I didn't see this email.... I just had a few hundred ones. I hate it when you don't read your personal emails for a few days. :-(( I'm not really happy with having different download locations. Please put it on our FTP server into the testing directory. It then get's copied to all our mirror servers. You could think about providing another mirror server. Heiko |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2003-07-12 02:44:07
|
> I didn't see this email.... I just had a few hundred ones. I hate it > when you don't read your personal emails for a few days. :-(( Yeah, they add up quickly. > I'm not really happy with having different download locations. Please > put it on our FTP server into the testing directory. It then get's > copied to all our mirror servers. OK. > You could think about providing another mirror server. What does that take? How much disk space is required? One other thing I thought of (looking at the feature requests, I saw CryptoAPI). Would we get in trouble having a mirror in the US, considering the stupid US export laws on encryption? Is there any other strong encryption currently in DL? Or planned? - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2003-07-12 03:00:18
|
Bruce Smith wrote: >>I didn't see this email.... I just had a few hundred ones. I hate it >>when you don't read your personal emails for a few days. :-(( > > > Yeah, they add up quickly. > > >>I'm not really happy with having different download locations. Please >>put it on our FTP server into the testing directory. It then get's >>copied to all our mirror servers. > > > OK. > > >>You could think about providing another mirror server. > > > What does that take? How much disk space is required? I don't know, I would guess around 1 GB. > > One other thing I thought of (looking at the feature requests, I > saw CryptoAPI). Would we get in trouble having a mirror in the US, > considering the stupid US export laws on encryption? Is there any > other strong encryption currently in DL? Or planned? Actually yes. We use AES encryption with FreeS/WAN. I'm not a lawyer, but is it OK when we just compile and distribute that stuff? Or is even that not allowed? Heiko |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2003-07-12 11:14:52
|
> >>You could think about providing another mirror server. > > > > What does that take? How much disk space is required? > > I don't know, I would guess around 1 GB. That's not a problem. > > One other thing I thought of (looking at the feature requests, I > > saw CryptoAPI). Would we get in trouble having a mirror in the US, > > considering the stupid US export laws on encryption? Is there any > > other strong encryption currently in DL? Or planned? > > Actually yes. > We use AES encryption with FreeS/WAN. I'm not a lawyer, but is it OK > when we just compile and distribute that stuff? Or is even that not allowed? You're talking about only mirroring the testing ISO images? Not the source? I don't know either. I see there is a 0.5 ISO available for download on sourceforge. Is their server in the US? Does 0.5 have AES encryption? - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2003-07-12 12:50:18
|
Bruce Smith wrote: >>>>You could think about providing another mirror server. >>> >>>What does that take? How much disk space is required? >> >>I don't know, I would guess around 1 GB. > > > That's not a problem. cool >>>One other thing I thought of (looking at the feature requests, I >>>saw CryptoAPI). Would we get in trouble having a mirror in the US, >>>considering the stupid US export laws on encryption? Is there any >>>other strong encryption currently in DL? Or planned? >> >>Actually yes. >>We use AES encryption with FreeS/WAN. I'm not a lawyer, but is it OK >>when we just compile and distribute that stuff? Or is even that not allowed? > > > You're talking about only mirroring the testing ISO images? > Not the source? That's up on you and your internet connection. Of course, everything would be great. > I don't know either. I see there is a 0.5 ISO available for download on > sourceforge. Is their server in the US? Does 0.5 have AES encryption? No we added AES in 0.6. And no, this server is outside the U.S. Heiko |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2003-07-13 14:55:20
|
> >>>One other thing I thought of (looking at the feature requests, I > >>>saw CryptoAPI). Would we get in trouble having a mirror in the US, > >>>considering the stupid US export laws on encryption? Is there any > >>>other strong encryption currently in DL? Or planned? > >> > >>Actually yes. > >>We use AES encryption with FreeS/WAN. I'm not a lawyer, but is it OK > >>when we just compile and distribute that stuff? Or is even that not allowed? I've been asking around, and I can't get an answer. I see the FreeS/WAN stuff is on a ".nl" server. For this very reason? I'm going to play it safe and forget about becoming a US mirror. Sorry. :-( - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2003-07-13 22:50:16
|
Bruce Smith wrote: >>>>>One other thing I thought of (looking at the feature requests, I >>>>>saw CryptoAPI). Would we get in trouble having a mirror in the US, >>>>>considering the stupid US export laws on encryption? Is there any >>>>>other strong encryption currently in DL? Or planned? >>>> >>>>Actually yes. >>>>We use AES encryption with FreeS/WAN. I'm not a lawyer, but is it OK >>>>when we just compile and distribute that stuff? Or is even that not allowed? > > > I've been asking around, and I can't get an answer. > > I see the FreeS/WAN stuff is on a ".nl" server. For this very reason? > > I'm going to play it safe and forget about becoming a US mirror. > Sorry. :-( It's probably better. Heiko |
