On 2017-09-21 02:07 PM, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > Ühel kenal päeval, N, 21.09.2017 kell 22:54, kirjutas Michał Górny: >> W dniu czw, 21.09.2017 o godzinie 23∶33 +0300, użytkownik Mart >> Raudsepp >> napisał: >>> Ühel kenal päeval, N, 21.09.2017 kell 21:56, kirjutas Michał Górny: >>>> Hi, everyone. >>>> >>>> TL;DR: I'm looking for new people to resume work on sandbox, and >>>> I >>>> will >>>> most likely branch it at v2.10 and start keep-alive work on top >>>> of >>>> that. >>>> >>>> >>>> The state of our sandbox is not very well. Gentoo is currently >>>> using >>>> the old v2.10 with local patches. v2.11 is p.masked for a long >>>> time >>>> because of multiple unsolved bugs. The git repository also >>>> includes >>>> v2.12 tag that has not even been packaged for Gentoo. From what >>>> I've >>>> been able to establish, the bugs causing v2.11 mask are still >>>> present >>>> in git head. >>>> >>>> To add to this, the only person maintaining the code (vapier) has >>>> not >>>> touched it since March, and AFAIA he's not responding to any >>>> contact >>>> attempts from within Gentoo. Given this and the importance of >>>> sandbox >>>> to >>>> Gentoo at the moment, I think it's reasonable to presume he's MIA >>>> and start looking for volunteers to join the effort. >>>> >>>> I have already added myself to the project page [1] and I'm going >>>> to >>>> try >>>> to put some effort into improving the state of things. However, >>>> I'm >>>> not >>>> really an expert in the high magic used in sandbox. If anyone is >>>> interested in helping out, feel free to add yourself as well. >>>> >>>> >>>> The above considered, I don't think I'm really going to be able >>>> to >>>> solve >>>> the problems introduced by v2.11. If nobody has a better idea, >>>> I'm >>>> going >>>> to branch sandbox at v2.10 and look into backporting whatever's >>>> feasible >>>> and resuming development in hotfix mode on top of that. >>> >>> Do you have a handy list of problems with v2.11? >>> Perhaps all is well for Gentoo usages after the more ptrace-happy >>> fallbacking commit (apparently was needed by ChromeOS) is reverted >>> if >>> ptrace-path problems don't get fixes? >>> >> >> There are two bugs listed in p.mask reason. There's a lot of bugs on >> Bugzilla but I don't know which versions they affect. > > > #580726 comes from the ptrace thing I mentioned. I identified the > commit that makes it fallback to ptrace for firefox case, while it > seemed to work fine before without fallback, and then there are issues > in that ptrace codepath that might have always been there, but they > just didn't get hit due to ptrace fallback being much rarer before > this. I believe the commit hash is mentioned on the bug. >
I have been running sandbox-2.11 for quite awhile on my workstation, the only problem I have actually encountered is the issue with Firefox. That issue seems to have gone away in firefox-55 though, so I am not sure that it is going to be relevant for much longer. > #578582 seems to be just patrick being special and refusing to provide > any information about the bug that no-one else hits. > > Maybe if we revert that more easy ptrace fallback stuff for now, the > rest in sandbox git master is fine (if my opendir fix gets applied > that's only patched in via ebuild right now)? > > Mart >
