Nп/п : 6 из 100
От : Benny Pedersen 2:230/0 26 июл 23 07:45:42
К : Maurice Kinal 26 июл 23 11:18:11
Тема : how many kernels must a penguin compile before they call it stable?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID: 2:230/0 64c0d238
@REPLY: 1:153/7001.2989 64c08f1b
@TZUTC: 0000
@CHRS: LATIN-1 2
@TID: hpt/lnx 1.9.0-cur 17-02-17
Hello Maurice!
26 Jul 2023 03:12, Maurice Kinal wrote to Benny Pedersen:
MK> Which zenblead fixes?
why do you ask me ? :=)
MK> I just booted it up on this machine earlier
MK> today but see little to no difference.
then you possible are fine with zen3 or zen4 with dont have this
bugs to be solved in ucode
BP>> keep away from zen2 hardware is safe on its own
MK> I am not convinced but it isn`t like I can cite any unsafe behavior so
MK> far. This machine is deploying a AMD Ryzen 7 5800U which if I am not
MK> mistaken is a zen3. The Europoint is on a zen1 (AMD Ryzen Embedded
MK> R1505G). I also have a zen2 but it is an Epyc and isn`t part of the
MK> fidonet mix. I am using it solely for R&D.
does it say epyc in uname -a ? :)
there exists zenbleed tarball that have tools to test if something
is missing in ucode, i dont know if the ucode is part of kernel, but
imho only 6.4.6 have zenbleed fix, not currently older kernels
i still don`t have any epyc cpu, so i am happy :=)
MK> As for the www it is even more fsck`ed than it ever was. No surprises
MK> there. I note many a site that won`t support my webbrowser anymore
MK> and it was probably the safest any browser ever is/was. Very sad
MK> although I never really cared for the www so I wan`t be missing it.
MK> How about you?
gopher is not well designed for roundcube webmail, lol :)
i dont know if there exists webmail based on gopher protocol, i
will let it be upto the reader to find why it does not work
sadly dovecot have planed to support jmap, but so far only
cyrus-imapd have it, on the other hand cyrus-imapd miss support for weakforced,
it complicated for secureity, i could just make reject rules in
iptables change to accept for a limited ip ranges where i have users, it
would be rock solid, firewalls should be static rule set, not dynamic,
and this is why i think fail2ban is designed for the incorrect problem
Regards Benny
... too late to die young :)
--- Msged/LNX 6.1.2 (Linux/6.4.6-gentoo-dist (x86_64))
* Origin: gopher://fido.junc.eu/ (2:230/0)
SEEN-BY: 50/109 103/705 124/5016 153/757 154/10
201/0 203/0 124 412 221/0 1 6
SEEN-BY: 230/0 240/1120 5832 280/464 5003 292/854
8125 301/1 113 812 310/31
SEEN-BY: 320/219 335/364 341/66 234 396/45 423/120
460/58 463/68 467/888
SEEN-BY: 633/280 712/848 770/1 5000/111 5001/100
5005/49 5019/40 5020/400 545
SEEN-BY: 5020/715 828 830 846 848 1042 4441 12000
5030/49 1081 1474 1900
SEEN-BY: 5036/26 5060/900 5061/133 5075/128 5083/444
5090/958
@PATH: 230/0 203/0 280/464 301/1 5020/1042 4441