From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 20 00:00:18 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3404516A4CE; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 00:00:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.FreeBSD.org.uk [194.242.157.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2646D43D46; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 00:00:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (Ugrondar@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i3K70BHW022727; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 08:00:12 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: (from Ugrondar@localhost)i3K70B6c022726; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 08:00:11 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) X-Authentication-Warning: storm.FreeBSD.org.uk: Ugrondar set sender to mark@grondar.org using -f Received: from grondar.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])i3K6uVIn021077; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 07:56:31 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Message-Id: <200404200656.i3K6uVIn021077@grimreaper.grondar.org> To: "Bruce A. Mah" From: Mark Murray In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 19 Apr 2004 20:58:54 PDT." <20040420035854.GA800@tomcat.kitchenlab.org> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 07:56:31 +0100 Sender: mark@grondar.org X-Spam-Score: 3 (***) MSGID_FROM_MTA_SHORT X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.39 cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dev/random X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 07:00:18 -0000 "Bruce A. Mah" writes: > > Yeah, I think I've got this. Harvesting is now turned ON by default. > > By the time the user has got to newfs, the secure reseed should have > > happened. Please let me know if this isn't the case. > > Thanks, Mark! > > I can confirm that newfs now works shortly after a boot to single-user > mode. Might take me awhile to get to a situation where I'm doing > sysinstall on a new machine again, but I'd expect that we wouldn't see > any problems. (If I had a scratch machine, I'd test it now!) Good to know. Please keep me updated with good and bad news :-) > Sorry if I was a little blunt in my earlier email...this was the > latest (and fortunately last) issue in a long chain of problems that > was keeping me from: 1) burning a 5.2-CURRENT install CD-ROM and 2) > using it to rebuild my ThinkPad. I didn't interpret it as blunt, simply a well-put argument for importance :-) M -- Mark Murray iumop ap!sdn w,I idlaH