Then I tried adding some more experimental features...
Attached is a stacktrace I encountered (pcap related):
It happens only when inside the chroot, right?
Yes.
Seems like the pcap patch
? You applied it on your own, or have I merged it somewhere without noticing?
See my signature about
Now, if someone could have a look at hppfs I could resurect my
honeypots.
I've not the time, however test the attached patches. The first one fixes the
basical bugs; the second one could be needed to fix a fd leak... but I don't
think it's needed at all, so test with only the first and
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 17:31 +0100, antoine wrote:
Now, if someone could have a look at hppfs I could resurect my
honeypots.
I've not the time, however test the attached patches. The first one fixes
the
basical bugs; the second one could be needed to fix a fd leak... but I
don't
On Thursday 09 June 2005 18:53, antoine wrote:
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 17:31 +0100, antoine wrote:
Now, if someone could have a look at hppfs I could resurect my
honeypots.
I've not the time, however test the attached patches. The first one
fixes the basical bugs; the second one
On Thursday 09 June 2005 17:56, antoine wrote:
Then I tried adding some more experimental features...
Attached is a stacktrace I encountered (pcap related):
It happens only when inside the chroot, right?
Yes.
Seems like the pcap patch
? You applied it on your own, or have I
[OT: Mostly SELinux discussion]
Yep, that part is much more specific to my setup: the place where you
install the UML instances is not part of the LSB, so I didn't include
the file labels in the previous email. What is the consensus on where
UML should be installed on a production system?
On Thursday 09 June 2005 19:52, antoine wrote:
[OT: Mostly SELinux discussion]
Updated the title too.
Yep, that part is much more specific to my setup: the place where you
install the UML instances is not part of the LSB, so I didn't include
the file labels in the previous email. What is
Yep, that part is much more specific to my setup: the place where you
install the UML instances is not part of the LSB, so I didn't include
the file labels in the previous email. What is the consensus on where
UML should be installed on a production system? (assuming multiple
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 19:17 +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
On Thursday 09 June 2005 18:53, antoine wrote:
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 17:31 +0100, antoine wrote:
Now, if someone could have a look at hppfs I could resurect my
honeypots.
I've not the time, however test the attached
On Wednesday 08 June 2005 02:34, Blaisorblade wrote:
On Tuesday 07 June 2005 21:47, Nix wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] suggested tentatively:
On Tuesday 07 June 2005 18:21, Nix wrote:
OK, so it's a -static TT build that's failing?
Exactly.
Built, with a randomly
On Thursday 09 June 2005 21:23, antoine wrote:
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 19:17 +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
On Thursday 09 June 2005 18:53, antoine wrote:
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 17:31 +0100, antoine wrote:
Now, if someone could have a look at hppfs I could resurect my
honeypots.
11 matches
Mail list logo
