$ sudo iptables-save
# Generated by iptables-save v1.4.21 on Mon Nov 23 09:21:27 2020
*filter
:INPUT ACCEPT [34770543:10927213333]
:FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [44380782:49731770844]
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 67 -j ACCEPT
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 67 -j ACCEPT
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 5064 -j DROP
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 67 -j ACCEPT
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 67 -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -d 192.168.122.0/24 -o virbr0 -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -s 192.168.122.0/24 -i virbr0 -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -i virbr0 -o virbr0 -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -o virbr0 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-port-unreachable
-A FORWARD -i virbr0 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-port-unreachable
-A FORWARD -d 192.168.122.0/24 -o virbr0 -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -s 192.168.122.0/24 -i virbr0 -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -i virbr0 -o virbr0 -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -o virbr0 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-port-unreachable
-A FORWARD -i virbr0 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-port-unreachable
-A OUTPUT -o virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 68 -j ACCEPT
-A OUTPUT -o virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 68 -j ACCEPT
COMMIT
# Completed on Mon Nov 23 09:21:27 2020
# Generated by iptables-save v1.4.21 on Mon Nov 23 09:21:27 2020
*nat
:PREROUTING ACCEPT [546068:241106435]
:INPUT ACCEPT [546058:241105414]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [322146:19516111]
:POSTROUTING ACCEPT [322146:19516111]
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 -d 224.0.0.0/24 -j RETURN
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 -d 255.255.255.255/32 -j RETURN
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 ! -d 192.168.122.0/24 -p tcp -j MASQUERADE --to-ports 1024-65535
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 ! -d 192.168.122.0/24 -p udp -j MASQUERADE --to-ports 1024-65535
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 ! -d 192.168.122.0/24 -j MASQUERADE
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 -d 224.0.0.0/24 -j RETURN
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 -d 255.255.255.255/32 -j RETURN
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 ! -d 192.168.122.0/24 -p tcp -j MASQUERADE --to-ports 1024-65535
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 ! -d 192.168.122.0/24 -p udp -j MASQUERADE --to-ports 1024-65535
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 ! -d 192.168.122.0/24 -j MASQUERADE
COMMIT
# Completed on Mon Nov 23 09:21:27 2020
# Generated by iptables-save v1.4.21 on Mon Nov 23 09:21:27 2020
*mangle
:PREROUTING ACCEPT [34770812:10927227100]
:INPUT ACCEPT [34770685:10927221399]
:FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [44380807:49731775556]
:POSTROUTING ACCEPT [44386272:49731961431]
-A POSTROUTING -o virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 68 -j CHECKSUM --checksum-fill
-A POSTROUTING -o virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 68 -j CHECKSUM --checksum-fill
COMMIT
# Completed on Mon Nov 23 09:21:27 2020
I think the rule " -A INPUT -i virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 5064 -j DROP" was my attempt to avoid having "Identical process variable names" warnings all the time when accessing IOCs running locally on my computer.
Dirk
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Michael Davidsaver <mdavidsaver at gmail.com>
> Gesendet: Freitag, 20. November 2020 16:37
> An: Ralph Lange <ralph.lange at gmx.de>; EPICS Core Talk <core-
> talk at aps.anl.gov>; Zimoch Dirk (PSI) <dirk.zimoch at psi.ch>
> Betreff: Re: AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest
>
> On 11/20/20 1:16 AM, Ralph Lange via Core-talk wrote:
> > Hm.
> >
> > Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT)
> > target prot opt source destination
> > DROP udp -- anywhere anywhere udp dpt:ca-1
> >
> > Wouldn't that drop all incoming CA name resolution requests?
> > But earlier, you said that printed channel names correspond to CA name
> resolution broadcasts coming in over the "real" interface.
>
> It is better to run 'iptables-save', which prints all of the conditions
> associated with a rule. eg. plain 'iptables -L' doesn't show input interfaces
> restrictions, which presumably this rule has. Note that 'iptables-save' only
> prints, and does _not_ write any files.
>
>
> > Puzzled,
> > ~Ralph
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 at 09:36, Zimoch Dirk (PSI) via Core-talk <core-
> talk at aps.anl.gov <mailto:core-talk at aps.anl.gov>> wrote:
> >
> > Bringing the virbr0 interface down makes the test succeed.
> >
> > iptables -L reports:
> > Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT)
> > target prot opt source destination
> > ACCEPT udp -- anywhere anywhere udp dpt:domain
> > ACCEPT tcp -- anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:domain
> > ACCEPT udp -- anywhere anywhere udp dpt:bootps
> > ACCEPT tcp -- anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:bootps
> > DROP udp -- anywhere anywhere udp dpt:ca-1
> > ACCEPT udp -- anywhere anywhere udp dpt:domain
> > ACCEPT tcp -- anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:domain
> > ACCEPT udp -- anywhere anywhere udp dpt:bootps
> > ACCEPT tcp -- anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:bootps
> >
> > Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT)
> > target prot opt source destination
> > ACCEPT all -- anywhere 192.168.122.0/24
> <http://192.168.122.0/24> ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED
> > ACCEPT all -- 192.168.122.0/24 <http://192.168.122.0/24> anywhere
> > ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere
> > REJECT all -- anywhere anywhere reject-with icmp-port-
> unreachable
> > REJECT all -- anywhere anywhere reject-with icmp-port-
> unreachable
> > ACCEPT all -- anywhere 192.168.122.0/24
> <http://192.168.122.0/24> ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED
> > ACCEPT all -- 192.168.122.0/24 <http://192.168.122.0/24> anywhere
> > ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere
> > REJECT all -- anywhere anywhere reject-with icmp-port-
> unreachable
> > REJECT all -- anywhere anywhere reject-with icmp-port-
> unreachable
> >
> > Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT)
> > target prot opt source destination
> > ACCEPT udp -- anywhere anywhere udp dpt:bootpc
> > ACCEPT udp -- anywhere anywhere udp dpt:bootpc
> >
> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > Von: Michael Davidsaver <mdavidsaver at gmail.com
> <mailto:mdavidsaver at gmail.com>>
> > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 19. November 2020 19:11
> > > An: Zimoch Dirk (PSI) <dirk.zimoch at psi.ch
> <mailto:dirk.zimoch at psi.ch>>
> > > Cc: 'core-talk at aps.anl.gov <mailto:core-talk at aps.anl.gov>' <core-
> talk at aps.anl.gov <mailto:core-talk at aps.anl.gov>>
> > > Betreff: Re: AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest
> > >
> > > On 11/19/20 2:11 AM, Zimoch Dirk (PSI) via Core-talk wrote:
> > > > I have just noticed that I had sent this only to Andrew, not to the
> core-talk list.
> > > >
> > > > The problematic interface is "virbr0" which may have something to do
> with
> > > VmWare being installed on the system. or maybe docker?
> > >
> > > Have you checked for firewall (iptables or nft) rules for this interface?
> > >
> > > The fact that all the packet counters are zero suggests that it isn't
> > > being used so often. Can you try to disable it temporarily? ("ifconfig
> virbr0
> > > down")
> > > Let's make sure we're chasing the real problem.
> > >
> > >
> > > > *Von:*Zimoch Dirk (PSI)
> > > > *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 18. November 2020 13:34
> > > > *An:* Zimoch Dirk (PSI) <dirk.zimoch at psi.ch
> <mailto:dirk.zimoch at psi.ch>>; Johnson, Andrew N.
> > > <anj at anl.gov <mailto:anj at anl.gov>>
> > > > *Betreff:* AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > $ ifconfig
> > > >
> > > > enp0s31f6: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu
> 1500
> > > >
> > > > inet 129.129.130.117 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast
> 129.129.130.255
> > > >
> > > > inet6 fe80::42b0:34ff:feea:5428 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20<link>
> > > >
> > > > ether 40:b0:34:ea:54:28 txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)
> > > >
> > > > RX packets 54764087 bytes 24015803269 (22.3 GiB)
> > > >
> > > > RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
> > > >
> > > > TX packets 55167521 bytes 54881613829 (51.1 GiB)
> > > >
> > > > TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
> > > >
> > > > device interrupt 16 memory 0xe1200000-e1220000
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > lo: flags=73<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING> mtu 65536
> > > >
> > > > inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 255.0.0.0
> > > >
> > > > inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 scopeid 0x10<host>
> > > >
> > > > loop txqueuelen 1000 (Local Loopback)
> > > >
> > > > RX packets 1322943 bytes 739804353 (705.5 MiB)
> > > >
> > > > RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
> > > >
> > > > TX packets 1322943 bytes 739804353 (705.5 MiB)
> > > >
> > > > TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > virbr0: flags=4099<UP,BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
> > > >
> > > > inet 192.168.122.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast
> 192.168.122.255
> > > >
> > > > ether 52:54:00:15:9b:3e txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)
> > > >
> > > > RX packets 0 bytes 0 (0.0 B)
> > > >
> > > > RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0
> > > >
> > > > TX packets 0 bytes 0 (0.0 B)
> > > >
> > > > TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *Von:*Core-talk <core-talk-bounces at aps.anl.gov <mailto:core-talk-
> bounces at aps.anl.gov> <mailto:core-talk- <mailto:core-talk->
> > > bounces at aps.anl.gov <mailto:bounces at aps.anl.gov>>> *Im Auftrag
> von *Zimoch Dirk (PSI) via Core-talk
> > > > *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 18. November 2020 13:33
> > > > *An:* Johnson, Andrew N. <anj at anl.gov <mailto:anj at anl.gov>
> <mailto:anj at anl.gov <mailto:anj at anl.gov>>>
> > > > *Cc:* EPICS core-talk <core-talk at aps.anl.gov <mailto:core-
> talk at aps.anl.gov> <mailto:core- <mailto:core->
> > > talk at aps.anl.gov <mailto:talk at aps.anl.gov>>>
> > > > *Betreff:* AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > After this:
> > > >
> > > > 1..24
> > > >
> > > > ok 1 - osiSockAttach
> > > >
> > > > # udpSockTest()
> > > >
> > > > ok 2 - epicsSocketCreate INET, DGRAM, 0
> > > >
> > > > ok 3 - setsockopt BROADCAST := 1
> > > >
> > > > ok 4 - getsockopt BROADCAST => 1
> > > >
> > > > ok 5 - setsockopt BROADCAST := 0
> > > >
> > > > ok 6 - getsockopt BROADCAST => 0
> > > >
> > > > ok 7 - setsockopt MULTICAST_LOOP := 1
> > > >
> > > > ok 8 - getsockopt MULTICAST_LOOP => 1
> > > >
> > > > ok 9 - setsockopt MULTICAST_LOOP := 0
> > > >
> > > > ok 10 - getsockopt MULTICAST_LOOP => 0
> > > >
> > > > ok 11 - setsockopt IP_MULTICAST_TTL := 2
> > > >
> > > > ok 12 - getsockopt IP_MULTICAST_TTL => 2
> > > >
> > > > ok 13 - setsockopt IP_MULTICAST_TTL := 1
> > > >
> > > > ok 14 - getsockopt IP_MULTICAST_TTL => 1
> > > >
> > > > # udpSockFanoutBindTest()
> > > >
> > > > # First test if epicsSocketEnableAddressUseForDatagramFanout() is
> necessary
> > > >
> > > > ok 15 - bind() to port 43731
> > > >
> > > > ok 16 - bind() to 43731 error -1, 98
> > > >
> > > > # Now the real test
> > > >
> > > > ok 17 - bind() to port 43731
> > > >
> > > > ok 18 - bind() to port 43731
> > > >
> > > > # udpSockFanoutTest()
> > > >
> > > > # Interface 129.129.130.255:5064 <http://129.129.130.255:5064>
> > > >
> > > > # Not LO
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 start
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 start
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 0
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 0
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 1
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 1
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 2
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 2
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 3
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 3
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 4
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 4
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 5
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 end
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 5
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 end
> > > >
> > > > # Result: RX1 3f:0 RX2 3f:0
> > > >
> > > > # Interface 192.168.122.255:5064 <http://192.168.122.255:5064>
> > > >
> > > > # Not LO
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 start
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 start
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > Now it repeatedly prints "# RX ignore" forever...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *Von:*Johnson, Andrew N. <anj at anl.gov <mailto:anj at anl.gov>
> <mailto:anj at anl.gov <mailto:anj at anl.gov>>>
> > > > *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 17. November 2020 18:11
> > > > *An:* Zimoch Dirk (PSI) <dirk.zimoch at psi.ch
> <mailto:dirk.zimoch at psi.ch> <mailto:dirk.zimoch at psi.ch
> <mailto:dirk.zimoch at psi.ch>>>
> > > > *Cc:* EPICS core-talk <core-talk at aps.anl.gov <mailto:core-
> talk at aps.anl.gov> <mailto:core- <mailto:core->
> > > talk at aps.anl.gov <mailto:talk at aps.anl.gov>>>
> > > > *Betreff:* Re: Problems with hanging osiSockTest
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dirk,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What happens if you run that test manually? All EPICS unit tests can
> be run
> > > individually without using the test harness to see more details as the
> test
> > > proceeds. This is my output on RHEL-7.8, which takes about 6 seconds
> to run:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *tux% *cd modules/libcom/test/O.linux-x86_64/
> > > >
> > > > *tux% *./osiSockTest
> > > >
> > > > 1..24
> > > >
> > > > ok 1 - osiSockAttach
> > > >
> > > > # udpSockTest()
> > > >
> > > > ok 2 - epicsSocketCreate INET, DGRAM, 0
> > > >
> > > > ok 3 - setsockopt BROADCAST := 1
> > > >
> > > > ok 4 - getsockopt BROADCAST => 1
> > > >
> > > > ok 5 - setsockopt BROADCAST := 0
> > > >
> > > > ok 6 - getsockopt BROADCAST => 0
> > > >
> > > > ok 7 - setsockopt MULTICAST_LOOP := 1
> > > >
> > > > ok 8 - getsockopt MULTICAST_LOOP => 1
> > > >
> > > > ok 9 - setsockopt MULTICAST_LOOP := 0
> > > >
> > > > ok 10 - getsockopt MULTICAST_LOOP => 0
> > > >
> > > > ok 11 - setsockopt IP_MULTICAST_TTL := 2
> > > >
> > > > ok 12 - getsockopt IP_MULTICAST_TTL => 2
> > > >
> > > > ok 13 - setsockopt IP_MULTICAST_TTL := 1
> > > >
> > > > ok 14 - getsockopt IP_MULTICAST_TTL => 1
> > > >
> > > > # udpSockFanoutBindTest()
> > > >
> > > > # First test if epicsSocketEnableAddressUseForDatagramFanout() is
> > > necessary
> > > >
> > > > ok 15 - bind() to port 55467
> > > >
> > > > ok 16 - bind() to 55467 error -1, 98
> > > >
> > > > # Now the real test
> > > >
> > > > ok 17 - bind() to port 55467
> > > >
> > > > ok 18 - bind() to port 55467
> > > >
> > > > # udpSockFanoutTest()
> > > >
> > > > # Interface 164.54.11.255:5064 <http://164.54.11.255:5064>
> > > >
> > > > # Not LO
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 start
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 start
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 0
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 0
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 1
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 1
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 2
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 2
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 3
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 3
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 4
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 4
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 5
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 end
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 5
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 end
> > > >
> > > > # Result: RX1 3f:0 RX2 3f:0
> > > >
> > > > # Interface 192.168.122.255:5064 <http://192.168.122.255:5064>
> > > >
> > > > # Not LO
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 start
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 start
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 0
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 0
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 1
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 1
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 2
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 2
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX ignore
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 3
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 3
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 4
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 4
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 success 5
> > > >
> > > > # RX1 end
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 success 5
> > > >
> > > > # RX2 end
> > > >
> > > > # Result: RX1 3f:0 RX2 3f:0
> > > >
> > > > ok 19 - Found non-loopback interface
> > > >
> > > > ok 20 - Successes 2
> > > >
> > > > # tcpSockReuseBindTest(0)
> > > >
> > > > ok 21 - bind() to port 53058
> > > >
> > > > ok 22 - bind() to 53058 error -1, 98
> > > >
> > > > # tcpSockReuseBindTest(1)
> > > >
> > > > # epicsSocketEnableAddressReuseDuringTimeWaitState
> > > >
> > > > ok 23 - bind() to port 34068
> > > >
> > > > ok 24 - bind() to 34068 error -1, 98
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Results
> > > >
> > > > =======
> > > >
> > > > Tests: 24
> > > >
> > > > Passed: 24 = 100.00%
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Andrew
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Nov 17, 2020, at 4:47 AM, Zimoch Dirk (PSI) via Core-talk <core-
> > > talk at aps.anl.gov <mailto:talk at aps.anl.gov> <mailto:core-
> talk at aps.anl.gov <mailto:core-talk at aps.anl.gov>>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello everybody,
> > > >
> > > > I have problems with a test in EPICS 7 commit
> > > 8fd36d8eef3420b42e7936e949928a6b43df7e15.
> > > >
> > > > osiSockTest seems to take forever.
> > > >
> > > > 'make runtests' hangs here:
> > > > osiSockTest.t ................. 1/24
> > > >
> > > > 'make tapfiles' hangs here:
> > > > perl -CSD osiSockTest.t -tap > osiSockTest.tap
> > > >
> > > > I am testing on RedHat 7 (linux-x86_64).
> > > >
> > > > Any ideas?
> > > >
> > > > Dirk
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Complexity comes for free, simplicity you have to work for.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
- References:
- Problems with hanging osiSockTest Zimoch Dirk (PSI) via Core-talk
- Re: Problems with hanging osiSockTest Johnson, Andrew N. via Core-talk
- AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest Zimoch Dirk (PSI) via Core-talk
- AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest Zimoch Dirk (PSI) via Core-talk
- Re: AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest Michael Davidsaver via Core-talk
- AW: AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest Zimoch Dirk (PSI) via Core-talk
- Re: AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest Ralph Lange via Core-talk
- Re: AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest Michael Davidsaver via Core-talk
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: New Travis CI pricing model Ralph Lange via Core-talk
- Next:
AW: AW: AW: AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest Zimoch Dirk (PSI) via Core-talk
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
<2020>
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Re: AW: Problems with hanging osiSockTest Michael Davidsaver via Core-talk
- Next:
Re: Problems with hanging osiSockTest Johnson, Andrew N. via Core-talk
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
<2020>
2021
2022
2023
2024
|
·
Home
·
News
·
About
·
Base
·
Modules
·
Extensions
·
Distributions
·
Download
·