Linux-Development-Sys Digest #26, Volume #8 Mon, 17 Jul 00 21:13:13 EDT
Contents:
embedded linux footprint size ("Alan C. Chang")
Re: a file security proposal (Michael Gu)
Re: GetModuleFileName() in linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Interface i8255 (Iwo Mergler)
Re: embedded linux footprint size (Bryan Hackney)
Re: a file security proposal ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Question: system() from C++ CGI to Perl with Kernel 2.2.16 (Lisa Wilcox)
why kernel-source only have i386 (Wesley Wong)
Re: why kernel-source only have i386 (Lew Pitcher)
PCI bus information access ("Chris Kotchey")
Re: PCI bus information access (Kaz Kylheku)
Re: PCI bus information access (Perry Pip)
Can't compile kernel!! (root)
Re: PCI bus information access (Grant Edwards)
Re: Question: system() from C++ CGI to Perl with Kernel 2.2.16 (Mario Klebsch)
Re: embedded linux footprint size (Wolfgang Denk)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Alan C. Chang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: embedded linux footprint size
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 23:33:49 -0700
Hi Guys,
I am new for embeded linux development, so, please, forgive me of my stupid
question.
Here is my question --- They are so many embedded linux companies which
claim that they can make smaller footprint size of linux kernel. However, I
was told before that linux is 32bits virtual-memory OS, so it needs some
extra storage space in addition to memory to do swaping and, usually, it is
a hard disk drive. I just wonder if we can have hard disk installed in a
system, do we still need to care about the footprint size of linux kernel ?
I mean, currently, hard disk is so common and so inexpensive and I do think
it can save very much money if you have a linux kernel with 0.5MB rather
than 1MB ?
Thanks !!!
Alan C. Chang 2000-07-17PM
===================================
------------------------------
From: Michael Gu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: sci.crypt,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: a file security proposal
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 15:44:24 GMT
Colin Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jul 2000 01:08:05 +0100, phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Sat, 15 Jul 2000 19:38:49 GMT, Michael Gu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>If this has already been done, please ignore this message.
> >
> >It has been done. There's a system that does this for Windows 95, &
> >which is now being poerted to Linux.
> >
> >>I suggest to add file encryption capability to the system ( kernal, or
> >>whatever ). The general idea I have is following:
> >>
> >> 1. system distinguish whether a file is encrypted or not
> >> 2. when access an encrypted file, system will get the key by some
> >>means. e.g. prompt for a password, read user config file ...
>
> Linux already has an encrypted file system. Search for cryptfs.
>
It seems to be a filesystem encryption program. I doubt it will offer user-level or
file-level encryption, that is, individual user choose their own key or choose
different keys for different files.
>
> [snip]
>
> --
> |Colin Smith: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Windows 2000 |
> | 86% of Americans support the banning | AKA |
> |of Dihydrogen monoxide... Where do you stand??? | The W2K Bug |
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: GetModuleFileName() in linux
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:04:28 GMT
Erik wrote:
> > Not if it's been unlinked. And binaries should still work even after
> > they've been unlinked;
>
> Why would they be unlinked? By Whom? For what purpose?
Well, that's no business of the application writer. Just assume that it
happens. Once a process is running, the inode of the executable is
locked and will not be released, even if all directory entries to it are
removed, until the process exits.
How would you like it if you published a program to your group in your
~/bin directory, and then you decide to upgrade it but you find that
because someone else was running it, you don't have the power to remove
a directory entry that belongs to you? This happens all the time on
another leading brand OS.
In fact, it's precisely the reason you have to reboot Windows so bloody
often: you install a program which requires to upgrade a library that's
already being used (e.g. the C library). Windows requires you to jump
through hoops to replace the library, i.e. quit all apps, replace the
library, restart the machine. Still, what do you expect for several
hundred dollars?
> > this lets them, e.g., be upgraded totally
> > transparently to the people using them.
>
> Are you talking about upgrading a running process? This doesn't
> make sense. You can't upgrade the binary of a running process
> and expect the process to switch from the old process to the new
> one. It doesn't work!
The process doesn't "switch" anything, it's transparent to the process.
It does work: both the old and new executables will still work fine. You
just can't see the old one in any directory though.
alan
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Iwo Mergler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Interface i8255
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:03:15 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christian Dahmen wrote:
>
> Hi,
> ich bin auf der Suche nach einem Linuxtreiber (Kernel 2.1) f�r einen
> i8255 Chip.
> Bei Conrad habe ich mir die i8255 ISA Karte von bmc gekauft (top Teil), nur
> unter Linux finde ich keinen Treiber.
>
> Wer kann mir helfen?
>
> C.Dahmen
Der 8255 ist relativ einfach gebaut. Wenn ich mich richtig erinnere, sind das
nur 4 8-Bit Register, Port A-C und ein Steuerregister. Es ist wahrscheinlich
am einfachsten, selber ein kleines Programm dafuer zu schreiben. Alles was Du
wissen musst, steht im IO-Port-Programming Howto. :^) Ich helfe Dir gerne bei
konkreten Problemen damit...
Iwo
[OP is looking for a driver for the 8255 chip. I suggested the do-it-yourself
approach.]
------------------------------
From: Bryan Hackney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: embedded linux footprint size
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 12:18:57 -0500
"Alan C. Chang" wrote:
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> I am new for embeded linux development, so, please, forgive me of my stupid
> question.
>
> Here is my question --- They are so many embedded linux companies which
> claim that they can make smaller footprint size of linux kernel. However, I
> was told before that linux is 32bits virtual-memory OS, so it needs some
> extra storage space in addition to memory to do swaping and, usually, it is
[...]
I have a soft realtime application where swapping is a performance pig, even
with a wide SCSI system. VM swapping is not required in Linux.
I think the more interesting question is: do you want a delicate mechanical
device in your embedded system? Aggressive kernel size management is usually
from having to fit it into too small of a ROM, but also for conserving RAM.
--
Bryan Hackney / BHC / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.FreeClassAds.com/
http://bhconsult.com/
http://bhconsult.com/bh/pgp.key
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: a file security proposal
Crossposted-To: sci.crypt,comp.os.linux.security
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 17:33:51 GMT
In comp.os.linux.development.system Michael Gu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> It seems to be a filesystem encryption program. I doubt it will offer
> user-level or file-level encryption, that is, individual user choose
> their own key or choose different keys for different files.
I would guess that's mainly because, for most people, either loopback
encryption (www.kerneli.org) or an application such as gpg meet their
needs.
--
Matt Gauthier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Lisa Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Question: system() from C++ CGI to Perl with Kernel 2.2.16
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 13:48:32 -0400
Hello all,
I've got a C++ CGI making a syscall to a Perl program on a Red Hat Linux
test server with kernel 2.2.5, and working beautifully. On another
system where the main difference is the kernel (2.2.16), it doesn't work
at all. I have combed through all relevant logs in /var/log and there
are no error messages whatsoever. It appears to be running the Perl
program, as error messages from its system calls are being logged to
/var/log/httpd/error_log. I've tried using popen() instead, with no
success. The C++ CGI compiles cleanly and runs as expected with
exception of the system call. The Perl program runs as expected when
run from the command line.
What's the problem?!?! Is this a security issue? Is this just a bug
and all I need is a patch? I'm using Perl 5.005_03, glibc 2.1.2-11,
apache 1.3.12, and compiling with g++. I *really* don't want to embed a
Perl interpreter because I think its overkill for what I'm trying to
do. However, if the problem is a security issue blocking the execution,
either within Apache or the kernel, I would be willing to do it. If
someone could recommend an example that makes sense, I would appreciate
it. All I want to do is run the program and have the results print back
to the user.
Any solutions to the problem would be joyously received.
Thanks,
--
Lisa Wilcox
SAGE Systems Developer
SAGE Project: http://sage.library.emory.edu/
Woodruff Library/Emory University
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 404-727-0961
------------------------------
From: Wesley Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: why kernel-source only have i386
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 19:30:07 GMT
I have just upgrade kernel to 2.2.16-3 using the i686 rpm. But I found out
that I need to patch my kernel. So I got the kernel-source 2.2.16-3 but
it's in i386.rpm. How come there is no kernel-source with i686 for 2.2.16-3
version ? If I must patch my kernel, thus by using the current
kernel-source.2.2.16-i386.rpm, will I lost all the great stuff for i686? (I
am using pentium II 500 MHz)
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lew Pitcher)
Subject: Re: why kernel-source only have i386
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 19:54:18 GMT
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 19:30:07 GMT, Wesley Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I have just upgrade kernel to 2.2.16-3 using the i686 rpm. But I found out
>that I need to patch my kernel. So I got the kernel-source 2.2.16-3 but
>it's in i386.rpm. How come there is no kernel-source with i686 for 2.2.16-3
>version ? If I must patch my kernel, thus by using the current
>kernel-source.2.2.16-i386.rpm, will I lost all the great stuff for i686? (I
>am using pentium II 500 MHz)
Not to worry. The "i386" referred to in the rpm name is the name of
the CPU architecture. The i386 architecture will compile for all Intel
processors (and compatables) of the 80386 compatable family, including
the 80486, Pentium, Pentium II, Pentium III, AMD, Cyrix, and IBM
processors.
The alternatives to "i386" are things like "StrongArm" or "68000" or
"S390".
Lew Pitcher
Information Technology Consultant
Toronto Dominion Bank Financial Group
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
(Opinions expressed are my own, not my employer's.)
------------------------------
From: "Chris Kotchey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: PCI bus information access
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 15:57:35 -0400
I'm rather new to Linux (4 weeks) and will need to be writing a small
program that will allow a user to query the PCI bus, choose a PCI device,
and be able to get/alter/set the values in the configuration register(s) for
a particular card (we'll be doing this to do some testing on a card we are
developing).
Under Windows NT, I had to write a separate device driver to access the bus
information, and separate application to do the editing/displaying of the
data. Is this also true of Linux? or are there calls I can make to
directly access the PCI bus information from a "regular" Linux application
(and where would they be)?
I'm just starting to read the "Linux Device Drivers" book, but I'd like to
try to avoid digging into this if I can do this stuff from a normal
application.
As an added bonus, would anybody out there know of any such utility that I
might use as a starting point/example?
Chris Kotchey
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kaz Kylheku)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: PCI bus information access
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 20:05:15 GMT
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 15:57:35 -0400, Chris Kotchey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Under Windows NT, I had to write a separate device driver to access the bus
>information, and separate application to do the editing/displaying of the
>data. Is this also true of Linux? or are there calls I can make to
>directly access the PCI bus information from a "regular" Linux application
>(and where would they be)?
You seem to be looking for the /sbin/lspci and /sbin/setpci utilities.
--
#exclude <windows.h>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: PCI bus information access
Date: 17 Jul 2000 20:15:54 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 15:57:35 -0400,
Chris Kotchey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm rather new to Linux (4 weeks) and will need to be writing a small
>program that will allow a user to query the PCI bus, choose a PCI device,
>and be able to get/alter/set the values in the configuration register(s) for
>a particular card (we'll be doing this to do some testing on a card we are
>developing).
>
>Under Windows NT, I had to write a separate device driver to access the bus
>information, and separate application to do the editing/displaying of the
>data. Is this also true of Linux? or are there calls I can make to
>directly access the PCI bus information from a "regular" Linux application
>(and where would they be)?
>
>I'm just starting to read the "Linux Device Drivers" book, but I'd like to
>try to avoid digging into this if I can do this stuff from a normal
>application.
>
>As an added bonus, would anybody out there know of any such utility that I
>might use as a starting point/example?
>
Look for a utitly called lspci, in Redhat it's in a package called
pciutils. The source code to that should have what you are looking
for.
Perry
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:40:46 -0400
From: root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Can't compile kernel!!
Hello,
I'm in the process of trying to upgrade 2.2.14 to 2.2.16 + the newest
ide patch. It appears that all the code is ready for compilation, and I
did make clean, make dep, and make config. The problem is when I try
make bzdisk. Here is what I get:
gcc -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -02 -fomit-frame-pointer -o
scripts/split-include scripts /split-include.c
In file included from /user/include/errno.h:36
from scripts/split-include.c:26:
/usr/include/bits/errno.h:25: linux/errno.h: No such file or directory
make: *** [scripts/split-include] Error 1
It files seem to be in the right place, but it can't find them. What do
I do? Any ideas?
Thanks,
Tom
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: PCI bus information access
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 20:50:50 GMT
In article <8kvofe$iao$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris Kotchey wrote:
>I'm rather new to Linux (4 weeks) and will need to be writing a small
>program that will allow a user to query the PCI bus, choose a PCI device,
>and be able to get/alter/set the values in the configuration register(s) for
>a particular card (we'll be doing this to do some testing on a card we are
>developing).
There is already a device /proc/bus/pci/... that provides this
for programatic use, and a set of command-line utilities to go
along with it. Look for lspci and setpci.
Somewhere there's a Linux PCI mailing list you might want to
join...
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Someone is DROOLING
at on my collar!!
visi.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mario Klebsch)
Subject: Re: Question: system() from C++ CGI to Perl with Kernel 2.2.16
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 23:00:57 +0200
Lisa Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>I've got a C++ CGI making a syscall to a Perl program on a Red Hat Linux
>test server with kernel 2.2.5, and working beautifully. On another
>system where the main difference is the kernel (2.2.16), it doesn't
>work at all. I have combed through all relevant logs in /var/log and
>there are no error messages whatsoever. It appears to be running the
>Perl program, as error messages from its system calls are being
>logged to /var/log/httpd/error_log.
It definitely would be a good idea, to look into this
/var/log/httpd/error_log and see, what error messages there are.
There is a method, that almost always gives you valuable information
about what a process is doing, and what error are returned to a
process: strace!!!
Since you are debugging a CGI programm, in doubt you have to strace
the httpd. When having problems in fork()ed child processes, you need
the -f option of strace.
73, Mario
--
Mario Klebsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP-Key available at http://www.klebsch.de/public.key
Fingerprint DSS: EE7C DBCC D9C8 5DC1 D4DB 1483 30CE 9FB2 A047 9CE0
Diffie-Hellman: D447 4ED6 8A10 2C65 C5E5 8B98 9464 53FF 9382 F518
------------------------------
From: Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: embedded linux footprint size
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 00:20:38 GMT
Bryan Hackney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>I have a soft realtime application where swapping is a performance pig, even
>with a wide SCSI system. VM swapping is not required in Linux.
Most embedded Linux devices I've seen so far were just booting from
Flash memory, without any harddisk etc. No swap space used, none
needed. On a 16 MB system you can even compile a Linux kernel without
swap - so this is ennough for a lot of applications.
>I think the more interesting question is: do you want a delicate mechanical
>device in your embedded system? Aggressive kernel size management is usually
>from having to fit it into too small of a ROM, but also for conserving RAM.
You don't have to do any "aggressive kernel size management".
On PowerPC, the full (not specially optimized) Linux kernel (version
2.2.13) including Flash drivers, ext2 Filesystem, TCP/IP and NFS,
gives a compressed image of less than 375 kB.
In a (compressed) image of just 994 kB you can pack the Linux kernel
with networking, web server, and about 560 kB of web pages.
On a board half the size of a credit card you can get the whole
PowerPC system (CPU, 64 MB RAM, 8 MB Flash, Ethernet, serial ports,
USB, LCD/VGA, CAn-Bus, ...) - that's more than enough for most cases.
Wolfgang
--
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Web: www.denx.de
A supercomputer is a machine that runs an endless loop in 2 seconds.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development.system) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Development-System Digest
******************************
